Re: FN-FORUM taking discussions off-list & OT posts (was Peter McCormack etc.)

date posted 1st April 2000 19:15

Point taken George. There certainly are times when an off list post
shouldn't be returned to the list. But, that wasn't really the issue. The
issue is in being concerned about it.

To go off list with information or a view that is sensitive, to a complete
stranger, is not wise. The fact that somebody posts your private
communication to the list is a reason for you not to trust that person
again - but it shouldn't be something you should have personal concern
over. In my case, I was more cross with myself than with the person who
posted my personal message for him to the list. I should have exercised
more caution.

As far as keeping on topic is concerned, this is a highly subjective
matter. What is interesting and on topic for one person is not necessarily
interesting and on topic to another. Having a moderator or list mom who
rigidly keeps the discussions of a list serve to within a narrow area is
restricting the list to an individual's range of interests, which can
prevent a list from evolving naturally.

I was involved in the start up of the UK Director Users Group a few years
back. Although a good proportion of the posts still concern Director, most
of the people from the original days have moved into other associated
areas. This has greatly widened the scope of the subject matter, but, it is
valuable in the sense that many people over the course of several years
have got to know each other and their differing views on topics are quite
valuable in preventing us getting too narrowly focussed. In other words,
the value of a list is in the association and mixing of minds rather than
being simple a source of narrowly focussed information.

But, maybe I'm speaking out of turn here, as the originator of the list
(Dan Winchester?) should be the one who dictates the policy.

peter
http://www.avatarnets.com






>Peter McCormack wrote:
>
>> Ha ha ha
>
>Ho ho ho
>
>------------------------
>
>Peter Small wrote:
>
>> George Dillon being cross at Peter McCormack for posting an off line
>post to the list... betraying a confidence, but...
>
>In the message to which I responded off-list, Peter McCormack wrote
>"if any of you are interested please give me a call on my mobile so
>that we can talk further about the details and plan of action", thus
>inviting off-list responses. The implication is that any further
>discussion arising from his post would not be done in public.
>
>> I was probably in the wrong for taking a discussion off list...
>
>No you weren't. That was your choice/judgement. Knowing when to take
>discussions off-list is essential to responsible list behaviour. It
>is the right thing to do if you feel that your response to the
>original post is either a) straying too far off topic or b) too
>embarrassingly newbie-ish to be of interest to the list or c) private
>or d) likely to start a flame-war. The other party could choose not
>to reply to you at all or to post their own answers back to the list,
>if they consider your question has an answer of public interest.
>
>However, to copy your private message to a public forum is not only
>bad etiquette in my view, but it is also of dubious legality. [ Apart
>from copyright and confidence issues, consider in the light of the
>recent demon case, the situation where that message to Peter had not
>*actually* come from me, and let's say for example that it had really
>been hostile or even that it had contained a virus... and Peter then
>publicly cried foul triggering a mass hostile response from his
>multitude of friends and sympathisers. When the dust settled, Peter
>would find himself in deep legal shit. ]
>
>What IS wrong is bringing off-list discussions back on-list unless
>there is a valid reason for making that discussion public (and/or both
>parties are in agreement that their words be made public). Valid
>reasons would include the conclusion of a discussion the results of
>which would be of interest to the list, or the reporting back to the
>list the discovery that someone was abusing it somehow. Valid reasons
>DO NOT include making public a private disagreement, or revealing
>information which has, specifically, been passed to you privately and
>by implication in confidence.
>
>On this occasion there was no great harm done, but the principal is
>important and my annoyance was not so much at my own embarrassment
>(which was slight), but at what I regard as further example of
>McCormack's immaturity and another (albeit mild) misuse of this list.
>
>Paul wrote:
>
>> I belong to several lists where there is much 'off-topic' posting.
>
>+1
>
>> The listmoms always try to keep it down...
>
>For a good reason - it's not what the lists are for, and too much OT
>traffic can lead to the busier (and often more experienced) listees
>leaving. We've already had one noisy exit from this list. I believe
>there are many heavyweights lurking here, waiting to see how this list
>develops before breaking cover.
>
>> Much of the off-topic mail is fascinating...
>
>+1. Actually I'm a serial OT offender on a couple of other lists, and
>I too love a bit of banter. I filter all my incoming list mail by
>subject and get quite excited when I see my OT folder filling up
>rapidly (usually on Fridays!) However, wherever I am, when I go
>shamelessly OT myself, I try to observe a principal they have over at
>evolt.org by 'paying' for straying OT with an on-topic tip. It's
>beautifully simple but effective rule and one which should be adopted
>here immediately.
>
>
>
>For a table with some fixed width and some fluid cells, try setting
>the widths of your fixed cells to "-1%" (to prevent them expanding)
>and putting a spacer image in them set to the desired width (to
>prevent them collapsing). Then give all the other cells widths
>totalling 100%. Not standard, but it works in IE, NN and Opera where
>other methods fail.
>
>(Thanks to Oliver Lineham)
>
>
>
>Hmmm, okay maybe that was a bit OT - more appropriate for Babble than
>FN-Forum - but it got me going this week.
>
>> Lists are amazing, and the best way I know to get information
>> and ideas and friends :-)
>
>+1. I've received this list since day 2 (damn - slow start!), and I
>have faith that when it settles down it will be one of the most
>valuable around, but frankly the jury's still out and it's up to all
>of us to make this thing work.
>
>Peace and good will to all, even Pete McCormack! :)
>
>George
>
>
>============================================================
>
> * Free listing for freelancers
> * Free to advertise jobs
> * Free jobs distribution service
> * Free database of 1000 freelancers
>
>Freelancers and Freelance Jobs
>http://www.freelancers.net
>
>To post to the Forum:
[EMAIL REMOVED]
>
>To unsubscribe please email:
[EMAIL REMOVED]
>
>For further information please visit:
>http://www.freelancers.net/forum.html