Trans wrote:
> Robert Dober wrote:
>
> > Hi Tom ;) (Guy is "ts" BTW) maybe the later, ruby-beginner might be too
> > negative, what you think?
>
> Yes. that's possible true, although it might also be comforting to
> those who are beginners.
>
> Name not withstanding, the significant difficulty with a separate
> mailing list is getting people to use it and for the purposes intended.
> I have some experience in this. I once attempted to start a ruby-rcr
> list. It was only mildly successful, but it was clear that it could not
> flourish without wider support from the core community, so it
> eventually evaporated (which is unfortunate as I think it's needed more
> than ever now). A new vs. experienced split of ruby-talk will have some
> of the same problems. Without committed support it won't work. And
> ensuring that experienced users visit the beginners list is an added
> challenge.
>
> Having reread over all the posts to this thread here is the conclusion
> I am drawing....
>
> At some point the split may be necessary, maybe we are at that point.
> But one of the great things about this list has been the cordial
> intermingling of new and expert user. I think many would agree that it
> would be nice if we could keep it that way. Perhaps we can find a way
> to "upscale" the list to work better for both beginner and experienced
> users alike.
>
> In a post script, Jeremy McAnally had written,
>
> "It would also be mildly entertaining to have an auto-answer FAQ bot
> that parsed the language of a message and if it could decently figure
> out what they're saying, post an answer pointing  to a (currently
> non-existent) Ruby FAQ..."
>
> I realize that automated replies don't have the niceties of human
> interaction, but I think something like this could go a long way toward
> improving list usage. Rather then automated answers just against a FAQ,
> automate them against the mailing list itself via the archives. An
> automated answer could then provide a list of links to related old
> posts. Even as an experienced user I would find this kind of
> representation helpful! Also, with these automated replies, experienced
> users who are already setting up "weak" list filters, could create
> stronger ones based on whether a new topic received an automated reply
> or not, and what the automated reply concluded about it. (In fact I
> imagine a Bayesian filter would be part of the bots implementation.) I
> think it would be better for us to try something like this, and see how
> it fairs, before taking the leap to two lists.
>
> What do others think? And also, is anyone up to the challenge?

I'm curious. Did anyone recieve/read this? I'm surprised no one has
replied to it, even if it's just to say "dumb idea".

T.