I think Daniel Schierbeck really wanted is to take n00b-caring off  
the ml.

I think this is a good ideia to promote clean, good discussion and  
thought sharing. However, if the n00bs were to be "outcast" to a  
different system (yes, i think ml is not the best troubleshooting  
system), would you still go there and help them? And if you would,  
would the majority also go there? I don't think so. IMHO, i think  
this would just degrade the level of the community receptiveness. Do  
you really want to bipolarize it?

If you really want poignant discussions, start them and make then  
regular. If you want to separate the "n00b noise", encourage tagging  
n00b mail. These are my two cents.

Paulo Jorge Duarte Kh
paulo.koch / gmail.com


On 2006/12/30, at 16:31, Gregory Seidman wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 31, 2006 at 01:07:38AM +0900, Daniel Schierbeck wrote:
> } Hello fellow Rubyphilics!
> }
> } As other have remarked, the quality of this list is rapidly  
> declining --
> } not because of a lack of participation, but rather because of the
> } increase of the same. Each and every question, no matter how  
> nubish, is
> } answered, which of course is good. But the deep, poignant (no pun
> } intended) discussions seem to have faded in both frequency and  
> quality.
> }
> } I therefore propose we establish a ruby-experts (or the like)  
> mailing
> } list intended for exactly those discussions.
> }
> } Thoughts?
>
> First off, I vote no.
>
> Second, I think there has been a drop-off in "poignant" discussions  
> largely
> because people have settled on what is needed (or, rather, the  
> community's
> view of where Ruby should be going matches Matz's view to a large  
> extent).
> At this point, there are really two major priorities for Ruby: some
> cleanup (piddling missing functionality like blocks that take  
> blocks, code
> cleanup/rewrite, removing syntax ambiguity, a formal specification  
> of the
> language, etc.), and performance (i.e. a VM rather than an  
> interpreter).
>
> The first is being served by progress toward Ruby 2.0, which mostly  
> gets
> discussed on ruby-core, I think. The second is being addressed by  
> numerous
> initiatives, including YARV, Rubinius, Ruby.NET, Cardinal (Ruby on  
> Parrot,
> which may or may not be dead), and JRuby.
>
> Third, I think you'll find that a lot of the "poignant" discussion is
> happening on blogs rather than the mailing list. For example,  
> _why's blog
> (Redhanded) is a great place to find some interesting discussion of  
> deep
> Ruby, particularly meta programming.
>
> Finally, try releasing something cool (that isn't a Rails app or  
> plugin)
> and announcing it. I think you'll find that there is a lot of room  
> on the
> current list for discussion when there is something specific to  
> talk about.
> Not to be a _why fanboy, but Hpricot has gotten numerous  
> discussions going
> both on ruby-talk and on the Rails list.
>
> } Daniel Schierbeck
> --Greg
>
>