[prog] Possible closure of this mailing list

[Darlene Wallach]

H. McManus wrote:
> Hi Mary and list members,
> 
> I'd like to echo what others have said and say I think it would be a  
> shame if this list were to disappear.
> 
> Mary, I'd like to address some of your comments inline below.
> 
> 
> 
>>This list seems under-used for a technical list. It had a total of 114
>>messages posted in 2006, and so far has had 13 in 2007. This is much
>>much lower than techtalk, where programming is also on topic. techtalk
>>has about 700 or 800 messages a year.
>>
> 
> 
> Quantity is no indicator of quality what so ever. This list mightn't  
> get the same volume of posts, but by the same token this list has  
> never ever seen an argument nor an off topic post. Just a very high  
> quality of response.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> - a lot of lists confuses people about which ones to subscribe to
>>
> 
> 
> I don't see how having to choose between separate lists is any more  
> confusing/difficult then having to choose between multiple topics in  
> the one list. I also believe using the topic feature of mailman is a  
> less than optimal solution for the simple reason it relies on a  
> person remembering to do the right thing. A system that works only  
> some of the time is largely pointless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> - it adds to our list admin load
>>
> 
> 
> If admin is a problem then I will be more than happy to admin  
> programming@
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> - it separates people from the larger groups that could help them
>>
> 
> 
> No, what it does is put people in touch with the most appropriate  
> group to help them. No point reaching an audience of x hundred  
> readers if only a couple are interested and/or capable of responding.  
> With this list,  the posts will always reach the most appropriate and  
> interested readers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>1. why either you think the traffic will increase markedly or the
>>present level isn't a problem
>>
> 
> 
> I don't think it will, but I don't see why the present level is a  
> problem. This list is being used as is it needed. The low volume  
> means it's very to easy to take lots of time to read and respond  
> fully when there is a post. Look at the last thread on structures -  
> some respondents put a lot of effort into what they wrote, something  
> I don't think would happen on a really busy list.
> 
> I'm a little bit worried about what I perceive to be a mentality of  
> if a list isn't overflowing with posts then there must be something  
> wrong with it. This isn't some corporate body where if you don't use  
> your annual budget then next year's will be reduced accordingly. This  
> list is no busier nor quieter than what it needs to be in order to be  
> a helpful list.
> 
> Perhaps if the programming threads that appear on techtalk were to be  
> diverted here, things might pick up?
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>2. why merging with techtalk would be a bad idea
>>
> 
> 
> Because techtalk is not the appropriate place. There is overlap  
> between discussing technical issues and programming, but they aren't  
> the same thing. Just as I'm not necessarily interested in someone's  
> packaging woes, someone asking how to setup NAT with iptables is not  
> going to be the slightest bit interested in overloading java methods.  
> I do realise you can set up the whole mailman topic thing, but to me  
> it's a less than ideal solution to a problem that doesn't necessarily  
> exist.
> 
> Hamster.
> 

Mary,

Hamster made execellent points. Please keep the
programming list, do not close it.

Thank you for your consideration,

Darlene