On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 16:49, scott mc <scottmc2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Jorge G. Mare <koki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> One clause that I believe is sorely missing from this etiquette is that of >> staying on topic. I can think of at least two reasons for adopting such a >> rule: >> >> 1) People sign up to a list to read about what's relevant to their specific >> interest(s). >> >> 2) Going off-topic derails the discussion and this affects the productivity >> of the list and makes it very inefficient. > +1. For updating and enforcing the mailing list rules. > There was an attempt to move that topic to a new thread but then some > still insisted on replying to the original thread continuing the > off-topic discussion. For me that's when I just started deleting > emails from both threads without reading them. I'm already on way too > many lists and I am getting close to dropping this one. -1. First, I agree that replying about different topics in the same thread can be annoying. However, I do not see the logic of it 'derailing the conversation' or 'affecting the productivity of the list' -- especially when the content is appropriate for the list. Those emails would still occur on the list, merely with a different subject. At that point, what people decide to respond to is their own business. Next, if the etiquette were to be updated, I would much rather see clauses that discourage emails that can be seen as inflammatory, insulting, or as personal attacks. There is simply no place for such emails. I believe that many would agree that such emails harm productivity more. --mmadia