Re: Important Info on - Mailing list pgsql-general

At 03:23 AM 11/11/2004, Net Virtual Mailing Lists wrote:
>Hi Kevin,
>
>I'm probably a bit more concerned about this than you are...  I don't
>want to have to post anonymously just to protect my email address...
>That is precisely why I stopped using Usenet about 5 years ago - it just
>got overwhelming...

You're posting anonymously now.  I have no clue who Net Virtual Mailing
Lists" is.  That said, your posts still appear in the USENet group so
there's no difference for you.

>I hope the owner of this list considers this issue very carefully.. I for
>one will probably find support for Postgres through other mechanisms (I'm
>not sure what those would be yet) if what you are suggesting may come to
>pass actually does....

Why not just continue to use the list as you do now?

>The quality of this mailing list has always been extremely high and it
>would be a real shame to lose that....

That wouldn't change.

>I know that I surely do not need any more spam... To say nothing of jerks
>posting infantile messages...  I have a job to do and this list (as it is
>now) is an integral part of that....
>
> From what it sounds like the Usenet folks have decided up until now not
>to participate on the Postgres mailing list for whatever reason..

It may "sound" like that, but that's not how it is.  Your email shows up in
USENet.  Either the two-was street needs to be repaired or it needs to go
away (The feed to USENet).

>I can only surmise that it is not that important to them

You can only surmise because you don't have any facts to reach a valid
conclusion.

>--- it is to me though
>(and I imagine a lot of other people)...    Why do we need to suffer at
>their expense?

It's clear that you don't get it. USENet is suffering at your lists
expense. This is merely an attempt to correct that.

>.....  I mean if they are going to actually contribute -
>great, but that is simply not what appears to be happening here....

They?  Who's they?

>I'm certainly trying to be open minded here, but what I've seen so far
>coming from them is not exactly impressing me and it is not too hard to
>imagine that it only will get worse from here.

If you really WERE trying to be open minded, you'd have a different point
of view.

>The reasons about "increased participation" only works if that
>participations is meaningful, which it simply doesn't seem to be.

Then vote to have the push to USENet from your list REMOVED.

>I'm not trying to be harsh, but a good portion of Usenet posters strike
>me as brats who don't know how to behave and whoever it is that is
>managing this "switch" has not done an adequate job of explaining why we
>should put up with them or in the alternative what is going to be done to
>keep it to a minimum (IMHO).

It's a good thing you put quote marks around the word switch.  The RFD is
to finally approve the group that are already receiving your emails.  Not
create something new.  The request for discussion is to repair the mess
your e-mail lists have caused.

Those people emailing the list get their names plastered to USENet too,
btw.  That doesn't seem to concern you.  Perhaps, rather than whining, you
should get involved in the discussion to make sure the charters for the
groups are sound.   Sound charters in a comp group means the trolls and
k00ks leave your group alone for fear they'll be ejected from their
NSP.   It would be a GOOD THING[tm] to repair this mess.