From lojban+bncCJzE7b_XFxDZv-PzBBoEBnbVhg@googlegroups.com Tue Sep 20 11:48:03 2011 Received: from mail-vw0-f62.google.com ([209.85.212.62]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R65MP-0000uX-6v; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:48:03 -0700 Received: by vws5 with SMTP id 5sf1741593vws.17 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:47:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:mime-version:date:in-reply-to:references:user-agent :x-http-useragent:message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=btlfTdOzkIjVOl9DUTGCzOT4fwPMHmDHwFhio0DUnNE=; b=JNqelx3mtSp1C8D2Gw/KEg61gssvVTUgZoHPabsdb41lKdk/KV40ONcrfHCT6AyC5X +1maaSGksZkpNo3mql+7oQyeNFcq+MNcrlMfWzKo4RPuqnv/MLt0TTcJopiR7mXvlLhT RgZjRsWUxgv8VY3/aqMnlawDcnNX9/Li6s5Z4= Received: by 10.220.201.194 with SMTP id fb2mr295627vcb.51.1316544473786; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:47:53 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.220.117.139 with SMTP id r11ls1339929vcq.2.gmail; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:47:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.148.8 with SMTP id n8mr284863vcv.52.1316544473026; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by z7g2000vbp.googlegroups.com with HTTP; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:47:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201109200127.39738.phma@phma.optus.nu> References: <201109200127.39738.phma@phma.optus.nu> User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110420 Firefox/3.6.17,gzip(gfe) Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Re: Should we have another mailing list for abstruse discussions? From: djandus To: lojban X-Original-Sender: jandew@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: ls.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jandew@gmail.com designates internal as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jandew@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 So, two main issues. Messy threads: 1) often don't have conclusion 2) could send the wrong message to new Lojbanists I like the solution of moving people, but I also understand the issue of threads only get long after they start short. Since I've seen people implement the whole Google Groups name-changing thing before, I assume this solution is a possibility: If a thread is probably going to be too long/theoretical, post it on the alternate. If a thread starts short, then gets too long/theoretical, declare it by adding [lojban-theory] or something similar in the title, send an email with link to continuation thread elsewhere that is crosslinked back to the original discussion. It seems somewhat messy, but we're trying to deal with messy threads. Also, as for addressing the "often don't have conclusion" issue, what about having some implied goal of every [lojban-theory] thread be to have a lojban.org wiki page that details either the conclusion of the discussion or the opposing points of view, always in a clear, concise manner. This page would obviously crosslink to any related threads, and that way it would be really easy to glance over something and understand what craziness is going on. djandus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.