On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Thomas Dalton<thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
You have to demonstrate that it has been achieved,
usually be giving a
link to the discussion where (almost) everyone was in agreement. All
you had was a mailing list thread where not many people agreed and
very few people participated at all.
Ah. Just looking through the list of current mailing lists:
Checkuser-l, functionaries-l, arbitration-l (sic), mediation-l (sic),
accounts-en-l, OTRS-en-l (also de, fr, etc.) - quite a few private
lists, actually, for such an open project.
I also note lists like daily-image-l and daily-article-l etc. - spam
basically. Greenspun? 25K was enough to get someone's name as a
project and mailing list title? Doesn't look really resonant with the
illustrators, either.
I get the picture, and if there were a relevant substantive point to
be made here it would be something like 'There cannot be a
resolution-l mailing list, regardless of how well-purposed and useful
it will be, simply because we already have so many useless mailing
lists, as well as private ones that people don't have access to.
And am I to understand that all of these have been vetted in accord
with the same process you promote? Hm. Links, please.
-Stevertigo