Re: Advice for sci.electronics.design




Luhan Monat wrote:
>
>Guy Macon wrote:
>
>> "THE STANDARD ADVICE:
>>
>> There is a way to influence what gets discussed in a newsgroup that
>> works well, and another way that has never worked no matter how many
>> people have tried it.
>>
>> What works: Post articles on the topic you wish to see discussed,
>> and participate in the resulting discussion. Use killfiles and
>> filters so that you don't see the articles that you dislike.
>> If you don't know how to use a killfile, use good old fashioned
>> discipline and don't read the articles that you dislike. Never,
>> ever respond to articles that you dislike.
>>
>> What doesn't work: Respond to articles that you dislike, complain
>> about articles that you dislike, complain about posters that you
>> dislike, complain about how terrible everyone else is for not posting
>> what you want them to post. Talk about how to respond to articles
>> that you dislike. Make the articles that you dislike the center of
>> attention, the main topic of discussion, and a personal crusade."
>>
>> -Guy Macon
>>
>> The above, of course, fully applies to my own posts - including this one.
>>
>
>I can see some logic in this persons advice. I am quite curious about
>what such advice other 'campers' here have on the subject. Is there, in
>fact, some consensus on how best to post questions, and respond to such
>posts, etc.
>
>After all, science has found order in even chaos theory.

There is indeed a consensus of the technical groups as a whole.
You can see it in action by reading groups such as comp.arch.embedded
or you can learn by reading the standard FAQ on the topic at
[ http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html ].

In sci.electronics.design itself you will find a couple of groups
of posters who dominate most topics through sheer volume of posting
and through inappropriate aggressiveness. Some of them are simply
flamers looking for trouble, but others are knowledgeable engineers
who, like most engineers, have serious control issues.

The reason most engineers have serious control issues is best
understood by reading the Dilbert comic strip. Yes, things like
that really happen, but they aren't funny when they are happening
to you. An engineer often has the solution to a problem but is
stopped from implementing that solution because bosses or customers
who know far less than he does have power over him. This, along
with the flamers looking for trouble theory, explains why we are
seeing such a rabid reaction to there being a moderated product
development newsgroup. They see it as just one more pointy-haired
boss trying to control them. What they don't understand is that I
am perfectly willing to whitelist anyone who isn't disruptive, and
that I am also perfectly willing to give them a moderator account
if they agree to reject disruptive posts.

So, how to make everyone happy? The answer is a simple one:

[1] If you wish to have a civil discussion about some aspect of
product design without having to wade through flame wars and
off-topic political posts, simply post to these two groups:
[ sci.electronics.design,misc.business.product-dev ] and read
the discussion there. You can then evaluate my performance as
a moderator and vote with your feet if you don't like how things
are run. (I would hope, of course, that you would make constructive
suggestions first, and I will approve such suggestions if the subject
line starts with the string "[POLICY]", which lets those uninterested
in moderation policy killfile them.)

[2] If you like the freedom/anarchy that allows most threads to
degenerate into flame wars and off-topic political posts, simply
post to this one group: [ sci.electronics.design ] and read the
discussion there. You will see all of the posts by the folks who
are in group [1], plus all the off-topic flames political posts
that you and others post.

By making the above choices, everyone gets what they want, and
the reader now has two choices instead of the one available now.

I invite those described in [1] above to join the discussion over
in misc.business.product-dev and to help me to build it up into a
place where working engineers can have a discussion about product
development. And please feel free to make suggestions as to how
to make it better. I want it to meet the needs of working engineers.




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Advice for sci.electronics.design
    ... >>> filters so that you don't see the articles that you dislike. ... >who, like most engineers, have serious control issues. ... >if they agree to reject disruptive posts. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • The Standard Advice
    ... > filters so that you don't see the articles that you dislike. ... >Engineer, I thank you for the Standard Advice, but unlike you, I don't find ... >It reminds me that there's a man behind the posts that can smile and laugh ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)
  • Re: Advice for sci.electronics.design
    ... >> filters so that you don't see the articles that you dislike. ... >> The above, of course, fully applies to my own posts - including this one. ... I wrote the advice above for a non-technical newsgroup, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Advice for sci.electronics.design
    ... > "THE STANDARD ADVICE: ... > filters so that you don't see the articles that you dislike. ... > The above, of course, fully applies to my own posts - including this one. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Santa Bill McReynolds
    ... others to cite cite cite. ... some are links to TONS of articles and discussions. ... know if you'd researched any of MY previous posts, ... I guess that's ALLOWED (to change one's mind, ...
    (alt.true-crime)
Loading