Delirium wrote:
Anthere wrote:
Delirium wrote:
Mark Pellegrini wrote:
Note, Angela asked me emphatically to make sure
you fight it out
there and not on the mailing list.
Ugh... it's nearly impossible to carry on a lengthy conversation on
the wiki. Mailing lists are a lot better: I can organize subthreads,
keep posts I find particularly interesting for later reference and
delete others, and so on. Can't do any of that on a wiki unless you
make a private copy of the discussion page and edit it yourself, and
then keep your copy in sync with the original, which is a gigantic mess.
well, this is very unfortunate for you, because Angela and I will
strongly favor use of multilingual meta over mailing lists.
And I, and quite a few others, will continue to favor the opposite.
Posting stuff on the wiki is great; having actual discussion on it is
tedious and nearly impossible to keep track of past a low volume of posts.
I keep basically NO track of what is written on the english wikipedia.
It is tedious and basically impossible for me to track.
But this is also true for several mailing lists as well. For example, I
do not keep track of the tech list, and do not read it for a few
messages whose topic attract me. I also do not read entirely the en ml
either.
I recommand that people attract my attention by telling me things
directly, or on meta, if they want me to hear it. I just cant follow
dozen of mailing list all the time. I am not wonderwoman.
It is far easier for me to follow discussion according to a topic mode,
such as on meta.
I do think we've had a vote on this on en:, which
also contained about
five pages of arguments back and forth on both sides, as it came up on
the Village Pump about 5 or 6 separate times, but I can't seem to find
where it got moved to. Links, anyone?
I do not represent english users only, but users of any language.
Corporate donation is not english restricted topic at all; it concerns
all languages. Hence it does not have to be on the english wikipedia.
I really don't see why anyone would want to use
such a terrible
discussion medium though. Discussion media in the 1980s on bulletin
boards at least supported threading and filtering; can't we at least use
something as technologically advanced as 1980? If it must be a
web-based system (despite the fact that email is better-suited to
textual discussion), there are several software packages that support
fully-threaded discussions, included Slashcode (used on
slashdot.org)
and Scoop (used on
kuro5hin.org). The latter even keeps track of unread
messages, a feature that is absolutely necessary to follow large-scale
discussions.
-Mark
Well, we prefer. It is much easier for both of us to work with. Meta
content is gfdl, and we can refactor propositions so that we can see
more easily where the consensus is. And we can find information back.