[ale] New Mailing List initiatives for ALE

[Alex LeDonne]

On 9/26/06, Jerald Sheets <jsheets at yahoo.com> wrote:
> ** The Problem **
>
Paraphrasing: [Some folks don't have time to read the ALE list. Some
folks feel the S/N ratio is unsatisfactory. Some other folks wish more
of the folks in the first two categories would subscribe.]

Personally, I don't think it's a problem. In fact, I think the
situation above describes a POSITIVE ASPECT of the ALE list - the
subscribers are a self-selected group of people who have decided that
they have the time and desire to contribute and the tolerance to
withstand whatever noise comes with the signal.


> I started taking an informal poll around April (around when we started doing ALE-NW at
> my offices) and got a startling congruity of response.
Please recognize that the "informal poll" is of little validity. The
administration of the [ale] mailing list should first and primarily be
decided by the active users of the list. Changing the list to suit
those who attend meetings but are not subscribed to the list (unknown
number, see my suggestion below) sounds risky at best.

> As such, something really needs to be done.
No, not really. At least, hard to say without some hard numbers (see
my suggestion below). Sad to see Chris Farris go? Yes. Prefer to get
more subscribers among busy area sysadmins? Sure. Worth changing the
list over? Not IMnot-so-HO... unless I see evidence to back up the
assertion.


> ** The Layout **
> [ale-announce]   (ale-announce at ale.org)
> This list is moderated and posting is restricted. The sole purpose of this
> mailing list is to make announcements to the entire membership of [ale]
> members about upcoming [ale] events. Any other postings (including
> announcements from other organizations) belong in the [ale] list.

This is a lovely idea, either way. An excellent resource for the "like
to attend and network, no time to read or contribute to the list"
crowd. (See my suggestion below)


> [ale]  (ale at ale.org)
> This is the original mailing list that defined [ale] membership. Discussions
> should be (at least tangentially) relevant to systems administration, or
> sysadmin issues in Atlanta. This list will be moderated for members of [ale]
> to post to and subscribe to. All posting attempts will be moderated for
> relevance to existing threads and content.
and
> [ale-chat]  (ale-chat at ale.org)

I see problems here.
- The description of the [ale] list does not mention linux... it
instead mentions system administration. I hope this is simply a
misunderstanding of the point of the list. My understanding of "Linux
Enthusiast" includes the first-time desktop linux user who just
finished installing Ubuntu who wants to know how to make OpenOffice do
such-and-such like he could in Word. If the [ale] list becomes
moderated, the description needs to be reconsidered.

- The moderation of any e-mail list will, in time, become politicized.

- The selection of moderators for any e-mail list will, in time,
become politicized.

The politicization of moderation often does more harm to a list than
the noise (see Dan Lambert's experience).


> at this time it just seems that these steps are the best for the group.
I disagree. It seems that those steps are best for a small subset of
the group of unknown size (see my suggestion immediately below).


So let's take some of the feelings, unsupported assertions, wants, and
guesswork out of this decision-making process.

May I suggest: First, create [ale-announce]. Pick 6-10 moderators
(minimum). Copy the [ale] subscriber list to it. Advertise it on
ale.org. Announce it at meetings. Over a period of, say, four months,
see exactly how many subscribers [ale-announce] gets who do not
subscribe to [ale], as compared to the number of subscribers to [ale].

Once you have that information, hard numbers, then we (ALE as a whole)
can make a reasoned analysis of whether [ale] needs to change.
Anything else is premature.

All the best,

Alex