[karc] Re: Freelist reply function confusion
- From: Phil Somers <pwsomers@xxxxxxxx>
- To: "karc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <karc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 12:54:09 -0800 (PST)
I think that the purpose for a list like this is 1) to distribute information
of interest to the group and 2) to discuss topics of interest to the group.
Overall, the purpose is to exchange information of interest with local
amateurs. Therefore, in my opinion, the default mode of this group should be to
reply to the group. In that way, discussion and exchange of information and
ideas are promoted. The traffic on the group expands. There is lots of good
interaction and interesting new information. If the default mode is to reply to
the sender, then the default is to not share and exchange information with the
group. It becomes a broadcast mode with private replies.
If the Freelist were overflowing with traffic and too many "person-to-person"
messages of no interest to the group, then I would agree that maybe something
be done to reduce the traffic. But it is very much the opposite. Discussion and
exchange has largely disappeared. There is almost no traffic on the list. I
would rather have the problem of having to delete a few messages to individuals
that were of little interest than to have a list that is lacking in
interaction, information and exchange.
So my vote would be that the default would be to reply to the Freelist.
Actually, the larger problem is simply lack of usage. Ron makes a good point
that, ideally, we should be interacting, chatting and exchanging ideas on the
repeater or other bands. That is not happening either. I would hope that more
traffic here on the Freelist might stimulate more traffic on the repeater, and
vice versa. So that basically means more participation. Leave your 2m rigs on
more often and lets use the repeater. Put more information and share more ideas
on the Freelist. It will be better for us all.
... Phil VE3HST
Other related posts:
