[LMB] OT: List question/netiquette

[Tzivia Adler]

Kiwi Carlisle wrote:

. I also didn't feel like
> wading through a gazillion OT posts, most of them unlabeled, in the
> hope of a single bit of Bujold lore or something really interesting to
> read.
>
how interesting.  i actually like the ot posts, bec they are usually quite 
interesting.  no where else have i seen 50+ posts (and we like to document 
things :) ) about feet/inches vs meters/millimeters and weght/volume. 
(granted, some of it is boring as heck)

any topic will spawn five other topics, often without changing subject line. 
that's -my- pet peeve.  how will i know when something boring became 
something interesting?  the other way around, i know bec. i'm reading it :)

the point is we have a lot of pendants on-list.  we like friendly debates. 
we don't particularly watn to change anyone's mind, but a general airing of 
opinions, preferably backed by common and esoteric facts, and footnotes, is 
all in good fun. [1]

the problem is when someone's friendly point hits off someone's hot button, 
and suddenly you have two or more people who's hot buttons work in opposite 
directions moving to less-friendly debate.  and they are both (all) very 
sincere about airing their opinion, and certain that the other person is not 
going to change their mind, any more than they did aobut the merit of feet 
or meters.  but in this, ---i am right and  you are wrong--- adds an extra 
level to the debate.
(no one in the feet/meter came out and said i'm right/you're wrong, did 
they? i didn't actually read all the 50+ posts)

> The list environment here can be very intimidating for someone who
> honestly just wants to discuss Lois's writing.  It seems as if one can
> post something that's entirely on-topic and have one word the post
> (say, kitten, or tunic) turned into an excuse for a complete hijack of
> the list for what seems like WEEKS, often without even the courtesy of
> a header change.
>
hijack the list?  no one stole it.  it's still right here.  everyone is 
having an opinion, in at least six diffetn directions.  i remember 
cat-blanket debate.  it went from, i would get myself one of those, i would 
like it as a gift, i can't belive she gave an ex-boyfriend a tacky wedding 
present, oh what a cute wedding present, do you think science will ever make 
one of those, what is the correct sort of wedding gift to give here and now 
vs. there and then, adn do you take into account one of the couple's 
preference over the other when you only know one of hte couple anyhow, and 
on and on.   some people took offense, in diffent directions, and others sat 
back and watched the show.  still others continued debating politely while 
trying to avoid the angry argument.

> It could be that I just need a more traditional, tightly-structured
> literary discussion list or online community, but the chaos here can
> be exhausting to read.
>
> Kiwi Carlisle

yes, chaos -is- exhausting.  you said you get the posts in digest form, 
which i did for a while too, and it was very difficult to sort out what i 
did and didn't want to read.  then i switched to one post per message and 
figured out (thanks to pendants on-list) how to automatically get all [LMB] 
posts dumped into a seperate folder for easier pruning.  and how to make 
sub-folders for stuff i think i might want to read but don't have time for 
now.  can't do that with digests.
order from chaos is very satisfying.

as to traditional literary discussion, by all means start your own ON topic 
thread.  we often have them, but as we're between books just now, they are 
thin on the ground.  no doubt people will respond.

the problem is (as has also been discussed on-list at some point) is that 
people who agree with you will not want to clutter the list with /me-too!/ 
posts when they have nothing esle to add.  so people who post really smart 
and comprehensive things don't get many posts, while people who post missing 
details will have a flutter of people responding to fill in the detail, and 
you end up with five or six posts saying the same thing.

or ons says something comprehensive and people -don't- agree, and they try 
to be comprehensive back, and someone (not necessarily the first poster) 
takes offense, and i believe we just had enough of that.

i'm just trying to point out that while nasty arguments to happen, lots of 
ot: is more friendly debate than nastness.


ziviya, running off at the keyboard today

[1]  is anyone on a different list that likes to post footnotes?