Jane Williams :
>How about 6: switch on the option to receive
>individual messages? Or is this considerably harder
>work than it looks?
That would be my option 4 - the badly phrased "open up [message receiving options]" - or option 3 - lump together all posts as now, but send once (or more) a day.
>Nils:
> > I receive all mailing lists in digest format as I
> > hate having to delete oodles of messages.
>
>Just curious: why? For me this means skimming the list
>of headers, selecting the titles I know I don't want
>to read, and hitting a Delete button.
Page down through a single e-mail, click widgets through a list of e-mails. Sound like pretty much equivalent to me, and I am puzzled by anyone regarding either with "hate" or as "difficult". Yet apparently some people do feel this way.
Or put another way, Jane's puzzlement at Nils' attitude is exactly equivalent to my puzzlement at her attitude. Need to find a mechanism for keeping both sorts of people happy(^H-ier).
>But how do we get round that one without having to
>repeat the entire half-conversation over here? When
>most of us will already have seen it on the original
>list? (I take it that such repetition would be seen as
>a bad thing?)
Most conversations can be summarised quite briefly. The blow by blow is irrelevant. See my post that started this thread for an adequate example.
>I wonder if altering the time of day would help?
>though with all of us in different time zones, I
>suspect this would be another case of "can't please
>everyone". At present it hits my inbox after I'm in
>work in the morning. My next chance to use a
>non-web-based email client will then be the next
>morning over breakfast: maximum delay between reading
>and easy responding. I'll have thought out an answer,
>and then completely forgotten about it, by then.
>Inspiration, if any, dead due to lack of chance to use
>it.
The time of the digest is, arbitrarily, noon UK time each day. Why? Because that was the default in the software. If someone has a really, really good reason for me to change it, I will.
I would note that no one is forcing anyone to read the digest when it arrives. Read and answer at your leisure - your e-mails will still appear in the same edition, regardless of when you read and write. One of the benefits of a daily list is that you can read it at the best time for you.
>I've now set mine to MIME, and will see what happens.
>(Not having much idea what was meant by this, I'd gone
>for text as being safe.)
MIME is a standard for delivering multiple documents in a single e-mail message. It has a bad reputation due to its normal use for e-mailing HTML spam, but can be very useful for things like digests.
Chris Lemens :
>9. Have the trickster waggle his bum at them.
Possibly the most helpful contribution yet. <grin>
Jane Williams again :
> > HQ-rpg is a chat in a bar or cafe, the
> > GD a disputation in the library.
>
>After a bit of thought on that one, I think you're
>right, and I also think it's part of the problem. To
>stretch the analogy a little further, the GD is where
>the LM scholars dispute in their library, with polite
>references to "my honourable friend" and much
>referring to scrolls. And this is a good thing.
Now if I didn't know that Jane had been here for many, many years I would assume this came from someone who had never seen the Digest. "polite references"? Surely some mistake?
>But where do the really creative discussions, the ones
>that grab everything from every source ever produced,
>go in the meantime? Not the kiddies bar, we apparently
>scare them (though I've never yet noticed any of the
>actual newbies saying this, now I think about it!).
>Not the library: too slow, and disturbs the hushed
>whispers. Back to a friend's house (via the
>off-licence)? aka private email? Fine, but others miss
>out.
Newbies are worryingly absent from the "newbie" list. Perhaps they're too scared?
"Disturbs the hushed whispers"? Again, have you ever read the digest?
The digest is not about hushed whispers, polite references, or anything else even vaguely library like.
On the digest you can have flame wars. You can say "fuck". I will not tell you off. Lots of other people might decide they hate you, but that is another matter entirely. You will only be "off topic" if you aren't discussing Glorantha. The *only* other occasion where I've "moderated" anyone is when they've been posting copyright sources without permission. I do not go around telling people to "shush" and neither should anyone else.
This place is not a library. This place is a debating chamber. Anything is allowed, any source, any idea, any specualtion. It is, in short, exactly what Jane wants, except we have one or two rules she dislikes.
And I notice that people were very happy to use this place for the purposes described when there was not another list, with other purposes and other rules...
Cheers,
Graham
-- Graham Robinson graham_at_albionsoft.com Glorantha Digest Moderator --__--__--
Powered by hypermail