[outages] List comment

[Michael K. Smith - Adhost]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: outages-bounces at isotf.org [mailto:outages-bounces at isotf.org] On Behalf
> Of Dan York
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:33 AM
> To: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
> Cc: outages at isotf.org
> Subject: Re: [outages] List comment
> 
> 
> On Jun 24, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:44:22 EDT, Christian Blair said:
> >
> >> We don't need everyone's traceroute.
> >> Hardly useful for others anyway unless they're your roommate.
> >
> > Actually, you have that backwards.
> >
> > If somebody posts a traceroute from a vastly different network
> > location,
> > that tells you something.
> 
> 
> I think the question really is - is this list designed for *reporting*
> and confirming outages?  Or is it designed for *diagnosing*/discussing/
> troubleshooting outages?
> 
> If someone reports an outage, there is a degree of working with the
> reporter to confirm the outage that is necessary.  (i.e. "AIM isn't
> working for me" and others either confirming or saying that it does
> work for them.)  There have, though, been a couple of threads where
> this exchange has seemed to go on for a bit more than simple
> confirmation and dived more into troubleshooting.
> 
> The "reporting/confirming" type of list is a lower-traffic kind of
> list that's more announcement/alert-oriented.  The "diagnosing/
> discussing" type of list could be a much higher-traffic list.    Both
> are worthwhile types of lists to have... but they also may attract
> different subscribers.
> 
> Based on a couple of comments I've seen here, I think some folks may
> have signed up thinking they were getting the first type of list and
> are less interested in the second type of list.  They may be more
> interested in "alerts" and not interested in "discussion".
> 
> I don't have a great solution to offer... I think the "community" here
> is probably too new to split into separate "alerts" and "discussion"
> lists.  I also personally don't care which type of list it is.  But I
> would suggest this difference in expectations is perhaps at the route
> of the original comment and others that have been on the list.
> 
> My 2 cents,
> Dan
> 

I like your breakdown.  How about a general consensus to preface subject lines with either "Outage" or "Discussion" until there is enough momentum to break the list into two?

Regards,

Mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 475 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/attachments/20080624/65a5adf7/attachment.sig>