Stuart McLachlan
stuart at lexacorp.com.pg
Thu Aug 6 05:32:26 CDT 2009
IMNSHO, there's nothing wrong with the the current list structure. Recent problem has been caused purely by several long threads which were clearly not Access related and which should have gone to the Tech or SQL Server lists originally I agree that we have a problem with not enough people using the Tech list. I would encourage everyone to subscribe and use it. Whenever someone posts to the wrong list, a moderator should post a copy to the correct list and also post a message saying that they have done so and request that all further response go to that list. This would also encourage more members to subscribe to the other lists. You don't even need to give someone moderator priveleges on the list to do this. If the BOD want to appoint additional help to do it - my hand is up. -- Stuart On 6 Aug 2009 at 11:01, Gustav Brock wrote: > Hi Andy > > I think your attitude wearing the moderator hat is very British - always polite, precise, and with good timing - so at least you have full support from me. > > Out of crisis grow solutions (as we these years can monitor on the largest scale) and I think your suggestion for an AccessD-Not list is very good. > > However, I would love to see the dba-vb stuff moved to AccessD which could be focussed on development stuff, mostly Access related but not exclusively. As Drew mentions, quite a few of us have moved from Access to other environments and others may be expected to follow. But I think most of us who have moved have not moved completely, and for example Shamil has done a great job constantly to maintain the link back to Access (Northwind). > Now, much the same way you can argue that the SQL Server stuff belongs to the AccessD list. Traffic is low at the SQL Server list and often relates directly to Access, and I see no problem moving that to AccessD as well. Sometimes we touch other engines and languages, like MySQL and PHP, and with this setup there would be no doubt where to post such messages. It should be no problem to include some keyword in the subject line as a guide. > > That would leave: > > AccessD: Access, other developer stuff, SQL Server and other database related material > AccessD-Not: Not the AccessD content, in effect the current dba-tech list > AccessD-OT: The current OT list, anything not relevant for the other lists > > Finally, I think I'm in line with most of the list members, that the value of this list is the massive and broad experience built from the sum of our present and current activities ready to support and educate you, not the count of messages per day. > > /gustav > > > >>> andy at minstersystems.co.uk 06-08-2009 09:09 >>> > The Moderator's Lament > ---------------------- > > I kind of started this thread off by speaking to John B, and I'm glad I did. > I feel the list has become unmoderatable, at least by me. I have neither the > energy nor the inclination to intervene as often as it would need to keep > the list on-topic. If the majority want the mod to show teeth, as said, and > keep everyone in-line then that'll be someone else. Then again I think that > sounds like another list anyway not ours. But we are definitely divided into > 2 camps on this. FYI on the few occasions it all gets too much and I do > intervene I get more howls of protest than thanks. That's not meant to sound > like I'm asking for deep gratitude, I'm just reporting what happens. > Personally, taking the mod hat off, I like the chat most of the time and > have some sympathy with JC's stance that without the OT stuff there'd be > nearly no stuff at all, but this thread is also showing that not everyone > agrees. So we need a ruling on this from the BOD, and when we have that we > need everyone to (more or less) abide by it. > > I am a little mystified as to why the AccessD-Tech list is hardly used. It > seems ideal for the non-Access and for the chit-chat. I suspect it fell into > disuse because too few people subbed to it so that if you have a general > (and sometime urgent) question the only way to get to a large audience is to > go to AccessD. So why don't we rename it AccessD-NonAccess (or maybe, in > homage to Wayne's World, AccessD-Not), put everyone on it automatically (the > key word), and use it as the sister list for all of the stuff we're debating > here? If everyone was on it wouldn't that work? And those who want just > Access can filter it into the bin. I know it's not an original suggestion > but I can't see why it wouldn't suit everyone. Ok, AccessD might then have > little traffic, but OTOH it might get more, because the current email-soup > may in fact be discouraging newbies. And those of us who enjoy the family > ethos of the list would get that from NonAccess. > > I'll end with a plea. Let's stay together, let's not change the overall > atmosphere of the list(s) but let's be aware that some of the quieter voices > deserve to be heard too. > > Your ever/over tolerant moderator > > Andy > > > -- > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com