Re: [CR]Notes from Listmeister: Wool jerseys, CR e-list basics, etc.

(Example: Books:Ron Kitching)

In-Reply-To: <FE317F25-000F-4B29-84BF-F21E1701DF18@earthlink.net>
References: <E99B4E21-1FB0-4976-837B-0FCEC83A35B1@earthlink.net> <8C9C37A7F4A5DC9-F10-133@FWM-M27.sysops.aol.com>
From: "Rodney Kugizaki" <kugi@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [CR]Notes from Listmeister: Wool jerseys, CR e-list basics, etc.
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:31:52 -0700
To: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>


Newbie here.

I have some experience in building and supporting 'communities of interest'. There's been a lot of recent discussion regarding Web 2 communities, policies and practices and philosophy. In general, success often comes from providing perceived value and from organic growth in self-moderation. Having now been a lurker/consumer of CR for a little while, I can say that I've not seen a problem with the use, dialog or frequency of anyone and have gained some insight into an area of interest for me.

CR is fairly active and the dialog and exchanges are of quite high quality. There's plenty of 'self policing' occurring, most through friendly reminders. If possible, it would be very nice to have presentation in a different format, perhaps by thread organization - then those not interested in a particular discussion can more easily skip it. My personal opinion is that the proposed restriction would only serve to stifle dialog and would substantially reduce the overall value of CR.

Perhaps this is off topic, or perhaps this is the topic - real dialog about subjects of interest with sufficient latitude given to encourage teh full range of participation - from lurking to leading.

Rodney Kugizaki Oro Valley, AZ, USA

On Sep 12, 2007, at 2:07 PM, Chuck Schmidt wrote:
>
> On Sep 12, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Dale Brown wrote:
>
>> So, starting with tomorrow, Sept 13, I am beginning a "week long
>> suspension of membership" to be issued to violators of the 3
>> message-per-day limit. If someone suddenly goes silent, you might
>> guess that they "had to go to the principals office" and maybe got
>> suspended. Funny to use that high school terminology, but
>> honestly, sometimes I feel it applies to some of the Internet
>> behavior I witness. Luckily it is not nearly bad here compared to
>> other forums...
>
>
> Dale,
>
> In the past I've always responded on the list because I have always
> felt that in doing so, everyone could participate in the discussion
> and learn something that way. Discussions taken off the CR list
> don't further anyone's knowledge except of course the two
> participating in the off list discussion. And then there's the
> large group of list members who like to listen in to the
> "conversation" but are too shy to actually participate.
>
> Pretty much on a daily basis I've responded to discussions on
> topics that I've been asked to answer that have obviously stretched
> beyond three posts in one day due to lively discussion. For the
> future I've decided it's probably best to take all the discussion
> on my part off list as it obviously conflicts with your three post
> a day limit as is your wish. I'll still be responding to CR list
> members but it will just be off list in the future and I'll still
> be posting ride announcements and Velo Rendezvous announcements of
> course.
>
> Maybe the off list e-RICHIE-style forum between friends is the way
> to go in the future.
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
>
>
> Chuck Schmidt
> South Pasadena, CA USA
> http://www.velo-retro.com (reprints, t-shirts & timelines)