[OT] Re: Transparency, Community? (was Re: List-Id Changed why? )

[Felipe Figueiredo]

Peace, Derek

On Thursday 31 August 2006 21:13, Derek Broughton wrote:
> Felipe Figueiredo wrote:
> > On Thursday 31 August 2006 11:23, Derek Broughton wrote:
> >> No, I won't tolerate your attempts to change the lists...
> >
> > ?
>
> Matthew has repeatedly tried to redirect this thread to sounder.  I just
> push it back where it belongs.

That's the point. It actually should belong to sounder (at least from now on). 
This isn't "user technical support". See my points on this below.


> > Excuse me, but since when is the list "ours" (the community?) The list
> > IMO is FOR the community,
>
> That's a pretty thin distinction.
>
> > and I strongly believe it will much better suit it's
> > needs by removing ubuntu-overal discussion (like "has windows bee
> > replaced", or "ubuntu is not free", god help us).
>
> And, as I said, I expect that that is the decision the community would have
> largely supported - and if we'd been consulted, and that was what the
> consensus was, I'd have been happy enough.
>
> > Did gmail asked anyone if they wanted another 1.5gig per account? Did
> > they need to ask anything about it?
>
> Of course they didn't need to ask.  

It was actually a rhetorical question... :) Besides, the important was the 
second one. They didn't even notify oficially, until it was done. This is ok, 
it is very common commercial practice. I think it applies to this list, and 
everything ubuntu-related when it comes from canonical.

> Nobody ever complained about getting 
> more than they asked for.  

Look at *my* point of view: some users (including myself, of course) think is 
a waste of good list resources to keep receiving non-tech threads in this 
list (including *this* thread, of course). So, by not receiving it anymore, 
we (those mentioned users) are getting more from the list. This is beside the 
fact that the list itself get less email.


> People would scream, though, if they were 
> suddenly told "the limit is now 100MB - oh, and that's effective
> yesterday".  We weren't even told _after_ the fact, until somebody asked
> how it happened.

I see your point. I just don't agree with it. I really subscribed to *this* 
list thinking it was exactly what it is now, officially, after the change. As 
Matthew said, the change was to make it clear the original intent. Maybe I 
was expecting something less than you did. Or maybe you just got used to the 
(excuse me for being rash) junk threads.

I think you are not yelling about the change itself, but the process behind it 
(if not, please correct me). Ok, maybe we could have been notified officially 
before, or after. But the case is IMHO the change is for the better. Maybe 
not for some, but for most.

best regards
FF