Re: Limiting postings -- looking at numbers

Subject: Re: Limiting postings -- looking at numbers
From: Goober Writer <gooberwriter -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:14:07 -0700 (PDT)

> I may be missing something, but I thought the
> original issue was how to deal
> with a deterioration of civility and manners on the
> list. When did the volume of
> traffic become the problem that needed to be dealt
> with?

Volume has nothing to do with the issue. I don't
neccessarily mind being confined down to a
single-digit number of posts (as long as I know how
many and when the clock resets). I think I was tied
for the lead with John Posada with regards to posting
volume in Andrew's compiled list. But, I don't mind
volume being cut down, as long as it fixes the
civility issue. I just don't see how it would.

Example in a 2-post/day scenario:

Someone posts what others may deem a dumb question.
Someone else posts a smart-a$$ remark. Someone else
posts a "what do you mean by that, but the original
poster already hits the defnesive and retaliates, and
thus is unable to elaborate that day. Meanwhile the
thread turns from resolving the original post to
discussing the smart-a$$ remark.

Example in a 1-post/day scenario:

Someone posts a vague question. 14 other people
respond with what essentially boils down to "what do
you mean?" Thread dies, at least for the day, and
most-likely won't renew itself the next day.

I'd rather see a high-traffic on-topic list than a
minimal traffic list that provides little benefit to
its members.

I agree with Gene. This issue is not about volume, but
about civility. I've already indicated my intention to
play along with regard to civility. I may still choose
the light-hearted route to a response, but I will keep
all posts civil.

CopyEdit-L, Framers, and HATT (just to name a few
other high-traffic techcomm lists) remain mostly if
not completely on-topic, and they are all higher
volume lists. The reason is not limited posting, but
effective moderation and list member buy-in.

Goober Writer
(because life is too short to be inept)

"As soon as you hear the phrase "studies show",
immediately put a hand on your wallet and cover your groin."
-- Geoff Hart

Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!


sourcing tool for FrameMaker that lets you easily publish your content
online. No macro language required!

Mercer University's online MS Program in Technical Communication Management:
Preparing leaders of tomorrow's technical communication organizations today.
See or write George Hayhoe at hayhoe_g -at- mercer -dot- edu -dot-

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.


Re: Limiting postings -- looking at numbers: From: Gene Kim-Eng

Previous by Author: RE: Nielsen and PDFs
Next by Author: more moderators? Great idea!
Previous by Thread: Re: Limiting postings -- looking at numbers
Next by Thread: Re: Limiting postings -- looking at numbers

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads