-=PCTechTalk=- Re: List philosophy
- From: "Bob Crews" <rec46@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 23:21:21 -0600
I have got a life. A very good life and am wanting for nothing. I say I
will be around 90 percent of the time. That don't mean I'll be sitting in
front of my PC that long. When I'm doing other things I have my PC turned
up so I can hear when someone says something. I am semi retired as is my
wife so we have a lot of time to do things and both of us have our own
computer so we have no problems with each other being on IRC. We like
helping others and being there for others because in our lives there has
been people there for us. Now we are returning the favor. Yes, I have a
great life and don't mind at all making myself available to help others and
my wife totally supports me. If you don't believe me, ask her. She's a
member of this group as well.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "The Keyboard Cowboy" <KBCowboy@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Bob Crews" <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 10:26 PM
Subject: -=PCTechTalk=- List philosophy
> Let me be very clear in my communication. Please see comments below.
>
> Regards from
>
> Bob -- the "Keyboard Cowboy",
> ,,,,,,,,
> =D4=BF=D4=AC
> Cincinnati, Ohio
> Scottsdale, Arizona
> ---------------------------------
> Sunday, 2/13/2005, @ 10:32:59 PM EST
> ---------------------------------
> I am only one; but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but still
> I can do something; I will not refuse to do the something I can do.
>
> -- Helen Keller (1880-1968) American Writer
>
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D|:o:|=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 20:42:49 -0600, Bob Crews wrote:
> | Bob,
> |
> | Well I'm really sorry you are so one sided and feel the way you
> | do.
>
> I don't think I'm one sided -- just very focused and clear <G>
>
> Number one, no one said anyone would quit this group
> | because there's a channel on IRC for them to go to and be able
> | to talk live without having to wait for someone to get done
> | cooking supper, or to get back from a trip or come to think of
> | it, the owner won't run off and leave someone else holding the
> | bag of running the channel/group.
>
> If people need answers as quickly as you outline here - this group is
> probably not the best resource - they need a live person where they
> live. To say "the owner won't run off and leave someone else holding
> the bag of running the channel/group" is truly unfair and
> inappropriate. Please don't make such comments.
>
> |
> | No one said they have to quit this group. If you don't like
> | the idea then don't bother coming to the channel. It's as
> | simple as that. I don't plan on quitting the group neither
> | simply because not all people are going to go on IRC. But for
> | those who are going on IRC, more power to them if they wish to
> | better themselves.
>
> This makes it sound like the IRC channel is better......like it's in
> competition.
>
> There's no reason to start jumping on their
> | cases and raising hell simply because they plan on doing
> | something you don't care to do.
>
> First, I haven't jumped anyone's case. I made the mission of this
> group clear - that's my job. It's not about whether *I* care to go
> there or not.......it's about doing something that I believe in my
> heart is NOT in the best interest of the members of this list. If
> people choose to go to the channel, that's fine. Again, let me be
> clear in my communication. I think the channel is a bad idea because
> it doesn't serve the majority of members. Every question asked in the
> IRC channel is lost to every member of the group that isn't on the
> channel at the exact time the question is asked. This has two
> serious flaws:
>
> A) the answer to the question can only be as good as the technical
> skills of the very few people who happen to be on at that very moment.
> I suspect that diminishes the quality of the answer by a great deal.
> Many questions are answered on this list by one person, and added to
> or improved by another....and another....until the answer is an
> aggregate of the group. This won't work on an IRC channel as it
> cannot go beyond those few on the channel at any given time.
>
> B) taking a) above another step......no one learns but the person who
> asked the question, and the very few on the channel at that
> time.........the learning for all those others who are on the list is
> lost! That's why these lists are so successful - when run right,
> everyone learns, everyone benefits.
>
> Those who have been here a while know that whenever someone says
> "write me off list for more information" or someone writes a Mod
> directly (happens a fair amount), we always.....ALWAYS ask that the
> conversation be kept on the list so everyone shares in both
> determining the solution, and learning from the exchange. Taking the
> dialog to an IRC channel simply negates the value of a e-mail list.
> It's not about you or me, it's about what process is better for the
> greater number.
>
> That is very one sided and dis-
> | respectful.
> |
> | As far as your last statement here, why do you think someone's
> | mother would look down on them simply because they go to an IRC
> | channel?
>
> I think you misunderstood my intent - perhaps I didn't write it
> clearly enough. I was talking about the rules for *this list*, not
> your IRC channel. I don't know what the rules are on your channel,
> it's not relevant here. What I was reiterating was the rules
> here......which most know well and that's why we have a really good
> list. Mods here very seldom have to discipline anyone....we guide and
> help.
>
> They go there because they wish to and maybe even to
> | better themselves. As I said, no one has been told they should
> | leave this group. The channel is so no one has to wait until
> | someone decides to reply to their post and so no one will yell
> | at them because they talked about something other then
> | computers or programs.
>
> This confuses me. You said "no one will yell at them because they
> talked about something other then computers or programs.". What I
> thought I clearly outlined was that we encourage a limited amount of
> "chatter" here as it helps create the community atmosphere! I don't
> think any Mods here have "yelled" at anyone on that issue.????
>
> |
> | More power to the new Mods. I wish them well. There will also
> | be channel ops on the new channel which is the same as a Mod.
> | The 7 supporters of the new channel will all be channel
> | operators (Mods). We are all supposed to be here to help each
> | other. The channel will not stop that.
> |
> | The channel can also be like a family. Just because it's on
> | IRC don't mean it's a bad thing. Before you knock something,
> | look into it and give it a try.
>
> This is frustrating. First, I didn't knock it -- I made it clear that
> it is NOT in the best interest, as outlined, for this e-mail list.
> Rather than just "knock it", I explained why I think the way I do, and
> obviously everyone can determine what to do on their own. We have
> very bright members here. I believe by presenting the facts, people
> here are smart enough to see the good and bad and make up their own
> minds.
>
> As to "giving IRC a try, I am extremely experienced in IRC. I was a
> heavy user and beta tester for Khaled back in the days of versions 1
> and 2. They are at 6.xx now. Old time users of IRC, 5 - 15 years
> ago, know Master Netlord from Undernet, and especially DalNet as it
> developed. I was a Mod, SuperMod, and channel owner (many channels).
> Believe me, I know it well <chuckle> None of that is relevant to the
> issues outlined here though.
>
> To allow, and encourage, a
> | certain amount of "chatter" is nice but the channel will allow
> | all the chatter no matter what it is so long as it has nothing
> | to do with porn. If someone on the channel don't like the type
> | of chatter going on at that time, then they don't have to
> | participate and are welcome to talk about what ever they want.
> | Nothing anyone wants to talk about will be shot down.
> |
> | Like I said before, the channel will be there for anyone who
> | wishes to talk and get an instant answer at that time. They
> | can and will still be part of this group. No one will desert
> | you're group. It is very easy to be in a channel and keep
> | looking at your email for messages. What's wrong with someone
> | wanting more for their time they spend on their computer and
> | what's wrong with someone wishing to have instant help for
> | something that might need the help right now and not
> | necessarily when someone gets ready to reply to their email.
> | There is nothing wrong with the group nor is there anything
> | wrong with the channel. Together we can all make a difference.
> | We can all help each other now in more ways then one.
> |
> | I have only one other question about the matter of this group.
> | If it was so important to G Man, then why has he decided not to
> | be part of it anymore? I have been here for a little while and
> | have never heard anything about him until today.
>
> As stated before, he had some personal issues he had to take care of.
> I don't think it appropriate to discuss his personal life here. He
> was one hell of a good technician and developed this list. Should he
> ever return, I will gladly give the ownership of this list back to him
> -- hopefully in as good or better shape than it was when he left.
>
> I WILL be
> | around the channel at least 90 percent of the time.
>
> If this is true, you need a life! That's what happens to a lot of IRC
> people, they get addicted <G> 90% of the time means you will be
> available on your channel over 21.5 hours of each and every day for
> the rest of your life...........do you really mean that <chuckle> It
> also assumes you are expert in all matters of hardware and
> software......that right?
>
> |
> | That really doesn't matter though. The group is here and will
> | remain here and I imagine everyone who goes to the channel will
> | also be here. It is very possible and easy to be in both.
> | Just as the channel is concerned. It will be here and will
> | stay here for a long time and nothing says the members of the
> | channel has to stop this group. I don't plan on stopping or
> | helping where ever I can and I don't think anyone else will
> | neither.
> |
>
> Look, lets not turn this into a major battle or debate. You are
> certainly free to go make a channel on IRC and members are certainly
> free to go there if they wish. I do not think it's a good idea, and
> I've tried to clearly outline why. Normally, I wouldn't spend this
> much time answering ......... but frankly, it seemed a good time to
> kind of reiterate the mission of the list, outline some changes, and
> hopefully get people excited about the future. There's nothing
> personal in any of this.
>
> Regards,
>
> Bob........AKA Master NetLord <chuckle>
>
>
> To unsub or change your email settings:
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk
>
> To access our Archives:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/
> //www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/
>
> For more info:
> //www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=pctechtalk
>
To unsub or change your email settings:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk
To access our Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/
//www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/
For more info:
//www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=pctechtalk
Other related posts:
- » -=PCTechTalk=- Re: List philosophy
