Josh Berkus wrote:
> Peter,
>
> > There shouldn't be any tangents or general discussion on -advocacy
> > either -- that's what -general is for. A one-time incident should not
> > lead to such drastic measures. If the marketing plan is no longer
> > discussed on -advocacy, what is?
>
> Since Monday, there have been 117 messages on Advocacy, of which about 65
> consisted of tangents around copyright infringement and MySQL. Further,
> Rob's thread was diverted into a discussion of Knoppix CDs, making it
> impossible for him to filter by thread. Looking at my personal copy of the
> archives, this is typical rather than exceptional behavior.
>
> I'm not willing to exercise draconian moderation on the Advocacy list -- I'm
> out of the office too much, and discussion would halt.
>
> Since Rob is offering his company's professional services *as a donation*, he
> is entitled to put conditions on that donation. The alternative to setting
> up a temporary list would be for him to deal with me only, and I don't think
> you'd prefer that.
They are using the advocacy list so they can reach lots of people in the
discussion, but they don't want to read stuff that doesn't relate to
them. Mailing lists don't work that way so I see no purpose of creating
a new one that is to discuss only things _they_ are interested in.
If you want, ask who is interested in their topic and just send an email
with everyone in CC and have people keep the CC intact.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
