Subject:
|
Re: A tiresome tirade (Was: garbage output)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 12 Apr 1999 20:31:16 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1057 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, sparre@sys-323.risoe.dk (Jacob Sparre Andersen)
writes:
> Todd:
> [...]
>
> > However, if one of the group's "elders" -- say, Terry or Jacob
> > -- were to
>
> That feels just like when kids refer to me as "the man". ;-(
Sorry, I didn't mean it like that. (Not that there's anything wrong with
being old.) By "elders" I just meant "old-timers" or "well-versed
participants" in the sense of people who have been around the group for a
long time and know the ins and outs and what's right and what's wrong and
are closely in tune with how the group dynamics work, etc.
An "elder" of a group could be someone who's aged 21 but who's been part of
a group since they were 17, even if there were lots of other people in their
30's who'd been part of the group for only a year or two.
> > take the lead and put forth such a suggestion in a formal way, it would
> > be my duty to support whatever decision the group made (as long as it
> > was arrived at fairly).
>
> I must admit that I haven't (cared to?) read all JW's posts
> on Lugnet, but from the ones I have read it appears that he
> has a different attitude to LDraw parts development than
> most of us.
>
> I don't think he as broken any Lugnet rules - and L-CAD
> never had any formalised rules, so I feel it would be best
> if we could manage this without revoking JW's posting
> privileges.
I hope that we can. I'm not holding my breath, though. No, he hasn't
broken any LUGNET rules -- written or unwritten -- and in a strange sort of
way, he has even contributed positively somewhat in that he has helped lead
to more insight on the .DAT uploading problem.
Yet, if there are any unwritten rules of collaborative projects (i.e.
L-CAD), then I think Jonathan has broken many of these. It is particularly
unfortunate that he has caused -- and continues to cause -- so much grief
for Terry, who is probably managing a large enough workload already.
> Could we request JW to discuss the quality of his parts in
> private with a "mentor" before they are posted on Lugnet?
Certainly.
> I am willing to take on that job for a month.
This would entail close communication with Jonathan via e-mail -- in the
hopes of finding and correcting errors and methods prior to public exposure?
Could you contact Jonathan privately and see if he is open to this idea?
> If I don't see
> significant improvement in that time I will suggest that we
> decide to ignore his LDraw experiments collectively. This
> could be done by revoking JW's posting privileges to some or
> all of the lugnet.cad hierarchy,
If we need to take the drastic route and revoke posting privileges, it will
be especially useful if the .dat group has been separated by that time into
a parts sub-group...I gather that we would want to ban his posting of parts
but allow his posting of models? The rules specific to the models area
would of course have to disallow the posting of parts in order for the ban
to be effective.
> but I prefer the "kill file approach".
But would stop the flame-throwing, the general ill will, and the grief for
Terry? Although you could killfile Jonathan, you'd still see many of the
follow-ups from other people. Effectively, I think you'd still see a lot of
the stinky smoke.
Killfiles are wonderful on Usenet because they are the only way to remove
someone from a group. But their biggest advantage -- namely that each
reader can decide on his/her own whether to filter out the offender --
becomes a disadvantage in a collaborative project environment. Even if
98% of the group's population is filtering someone out, the people most
intimately involved with the day-to-day processes must still monitor the
entire process, lest something bad go unnoticed. So even filtered noise
tends to drag the process down by wasting the time of those perhaps most
critical or bottlenecked in the process.
Here, it would seem to make sense to me to killfile someone in, say, the
.market.auction newsgroup: a free-for-all forum and data dispersal group
where nothing in particular is being collectively accomplished. On the
other hand, the .cad.dev/L-CAD group is an actual community with a group
personality and several goals being worked toward collectively. Although it
may indeed be bad for Jonathan's personal growth if he were banned from
posting parts, it would probably be better for the group overall if this
happened -- rather than continuing to bear the strain and drag of putting up
with his antics. But this is just my view. I haven't been around the L-CAD
group long enough to know for sure. One thing's clear, though: if the group
did ever decide to ban Jonathan, it is his own undoing.
Note that JW is not just pure noise, as SB was in RTL when he kept posting
those annoying OWT retail price lists. SB could be ignored because he
wasn't doing any harm to the process. JW is harming the process, slowing it
down.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: A tiresome tirade (Was: garbage output)
|
| (...) Really. I know how you feel. :-( I dread the day that someone offers me a "senior discount". (...) Thanks for the moral support there Todd. But I guess I am turning into an "elder".. or just an old fart? (...) He has contributed positively. He (...) (26 years ago, 13-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: A tiresome tirade (Was: garbage output)
|
| Todd: (...) I know. That is the difference between ":-(" and ";-(". The latter one should probably be followed by a plain smiley, but I'm not good at ASCII animations. (...) I will. [ ... ] (...) This sounds like a good solution if we find it (...) (26 years ago, 13-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: A tiresome tirade (Was: garbage output)
|
| (...) Well I don't think SB wanted to do damage but to sell below-retail priced LEGO to the RTL-community, I never saw anything wrong with that. No-on has had a go at dya-shopping in France for their continued retail posts every day - why not? I (...) (26 years ago, 13-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A tiresome tirade (Was: garbage output)
|
| Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) However, (...) Yes that's it (more to that question later). (...) Agreed. Perhaps I underestimate the amount of patience that he has tried over the months. Though still, as patient as we have been, flames (in (...) (26 years ago, 11-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
