Hi --

On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Massimiliano Mirra wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 09:33:08PM +0900, David Alan Black wrote:
> > > By agreeing on a set of tags like [XML], [GUI], [CODE] and the already
> > > in use [ANN], we keep all the traffic on one group/list, and allow
> > > people not interested in e.g. GUI discussions to use the `kill'
> > > feature of their newsreader on messages with [GUI] in the subject,
> > > while to follow just specific discussions, messages with no tag in the
> > > subject can be killed.
> > I don't think it would work, for a couple of reasons.  First, agreeing
> > on the tags....  Come to think of it, this is also the stumbling block
> > for me with splitting the list up.
>
> Yes.  The difference is that a bunch of tags does not involve nearly
> as much setup as splitting lists and still allows all the benefits.
>
> > I think/hope that a lot of posts are multidimensional.
>
> I think you are right.  Yet, if a considerable amount were not
> somewhat unidimensional, the issue of moving it to a separate list
> would not have been brought up in the first place.

But that doesn't mean it's a good idea :-) I don't know... I have some
very cloudy, unformed idea of Ruby and its community as having the
potential to reformulate some of the traditional categorizations, in
areas like newsgroups and module libraries.  The problem is, I don't
know what I mean.

[...]

> > Also, a system like that is sort of moot unless everyone does it, and
> > not everyone will.
>
> Inability to make something perfect should not prevent to make it
> better.

I'm just not sure that a mixture of messages with and without [] tags
is better, and I believe that such a mixture is what we'd end up with.
(In general, though, I agree with your "meliorist" position :-)


David

-- 
David Alan Black
home: dblack / candle.superlink.net
work: blackdav / shu.edu
Web:  http://pirate.shu.edu/~blackdav