Mark Breen
marklbreen at gmail.com
Thu Aug 6 06:07:34 CDT 2009
Hello All, I was tempted to do the usual, read and move on. In fact, I did. then I saw the next post from Jim Lawrence. And that promoted me to come back and post here. Like Rocky and JC and all the other familiar names I see here, I am also subscribed to AccessD since 1997 / 98. I no longer ask or answer many questions, but I still subscribe to the lists that we have. I really like the dba-VB and dba-Tech, and for me, the best way is to merge them all into one pool within gmail. I use Gmail as my archive, so I have all the history since 1994, which is good enough for me. I especially enjoy the tech discussions on tech and vb, and love the quick posts that Jim Lawrence makes, I would hate to loose those. I have to admit that I tuned out of the OT stuff, as it became too much. I would be happy with Gustav's proposal, and I would also be happy with the following AccessD: Pure Access / VBA AccessD: VB, C#, Tech, SQL Server, OS, Virtual Machines, IIS, Etc. AccessD: OT. I realize that this is diluting the [AccessD: Access] list even further, so I am just letting you know that it suits this one person, regardless of your decision, I will would like to receive the emails. In fact to be honest, I am subscribed to AccessD in gmail, but I have a filter that automatically sends it to archived, but I do read the tech and vb lists. I hate to loose the SQL server posts in AccessD however. Finally, the reason I filter out the AccessD mails is I thought they were still high in volume. If they are really gone low, then that does change my perspective on what I just proposed. If the qty of pure Access posts are low, then we could merge everything except OT, in that case we come back to. Is that a refection on our list? Have we all learnt what we need from Access, but are now still learning the other stuff? AccessD: VB, C#, Tech, SQL Server, OS, Virtual Machines, IIS, Etc. And Pure Access / VBA AccessD: OT. I have one last point to consider. When I have real technical question, nowadays, I google the answer and usually find it. I find I do not need to go to AccessD for many direct technical questions. However, what I get from the tech and vb lists is information though osmosis. IOW the daily chat about technical issues, keeps my tech knowledge up to date, on topics that I would not necessarily google directly. Is this osmosis effect the new mode of operation for DataBase Advisors? IOW, has Google killed the need for the 1990's style AccessD list, but have we emerged into a virtual chat room where the real value nowadays is osmosis of technology on a daily basis? Thanks for all your time for the last ten years. Mark 2009/8/6 Gustav Brock <Gustav at cactus.dk> > 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 >