Support Newsgroup Off-topic Cancelling

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
128 messages Options
1234 ... 7
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Support Newsgroup Off-topic Cancelling

Gervase Markham
[Followup-To set to mozilla.governance; please respect it.]

Summary:

This is the start of a discussion as to when, if ever, it is appropriate
to cancel messages in the support groups (mozilla.support.*). (We are
not currently envisaging cancelling non-spam messages anywhere else.) We
may write a formal policy on the matter.

Background:

A week or two ago, Chris Ilias approached me to ask whether he might be
permitted to cancel off-topic posts/threads in the support newsgroups.

When we created the new newsgroups, we adopted a "wait and see" policy
to see if any sort of moderation or control was needed. Happily, in the
development groups at least, this has not proved necessary.

However, as one of the people who looks after the support groups and
spends time answering questions, Chris feels that the same is not true
there. He has made several requests over a period of months to be
allowed to deal with the problem of particular prolific participants
posting pages of irrelevant chit-chat, even when requested not to. He
feels this makes the groups less useful for their intended purpose,
because users are put off and question-answerers are discouraged from
wading through it all.

So, after discussion with Dave Miller, Dave gave him access to the
Giganews management console, and I sent him this:

"Chris,

If you take appropriate account of the "respected project contributor"
status of anyone involved, if you warn first (now that you have
something to back it up with) and cancel second, if you escalate the
amount of cancels gently as long as people don't learn their lesson,
then you may use this power for removing messages which are offtopic, on
the grounds that the more noise there is in the support newsgroups, the
less useful they are for support."

Chris's first use of this power has caused something of a stir (perhaps
unsurprisingly) and accusations of "censorship". Following a thread in
mozilla.general, Deb Richardson has suggested that we have a formal
policy for this. This message is to start a thread to determine what it
might be.

My suggestions will follow in a separate message.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic Cancelling

squaredancer
On 27/02/2007 12:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gervase
Markham to generate the following:? :

> [Followup-To set to mozilla.governance; please respect it.]
>
> Summary:
>
> This is the start of a discussion as to when, if ever, it is appropriate
> to cancel messages in the support groups (mozilla.support.*). (We are
> not currently envisaging cancelling non-spam messages anywhere else.) We
> may write a formal policy on the matter.
>
> Background:
>
> A week or two ago, Chris Ilias approached me to ask whether he might be
> permitted to cancel off-topic posts/threads in the support newsgroups.
>
> When we created the new newsgroups, we adopted a "wait and see" policy
> to see if any sort of moderation or control was needed. Happily, in the
> development groups at least, this has not proved necessary.
>
> However, as one of the people who looks after the support groups and
> spends time answering questions, Chris feels that the same is not true
> there. He has made several requests over a period of months to be
> allowed to deal with the problem of particular prolific participants
> posting pages of irrelevant chit-chat, even when requested not to. He
> feels this makes the groups less useful for their intended purpose,
> because users are put off and question-answerers are discouraged from
> wading through it all.
>
> So, after discussion with Dave Miller, Dave gave him access to the
> Giganews management console, and I sent him this:
>
> "Chris,
>
> If you take appropriate account of the "respected project contributor"
> status of anyone involved, if you warn first (now that you have
> something to back it up with) and cancel second, if you escalate the
> amount of cancels gently as long as people don't learn their lesson,
> then you may use this power for removing messages which are offtopic, on
> the grounds that the more noise there is in the support newsgroups, the
> less useful they are for support."
>
> Chris's first use of this power has caused something of a stir (perhaps
> unsurprisingly) and accusations of "censorship". Following a thread in
> mozilla.general, Deb Richardson has suggested that we have a formal
> policy for this. This message is to start a thread to determine what it
> might be.
>
> My suggestions will follow in a separate message.
>
> Gerv
>  
I would reply to this post but, as I am not subscribed to the FU group -
and nor do I intend to - I will not be able to read any further replies
by other posters!

I would tend to presume that many other subscribers are in a similar
situation!

reg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic Cancelling

Gervase Markham
squaredancer wrote:
   > I would reply to this post but, as I am not subscribed to the FU
group -
> and nor do I intend to - I will not be able to read any further replies
> by other posters!
>
> I would tend to presume that many other subscribers are in a similar
> situation!

Tough. mozilla.governance is the newsgroup for governance issues. It's
called "being on-topic" - maybe you've heard of it? Although, given the
stats I did on offtopicness in mozilla.support.firefox, perhaps not.

The alternative is either a) people having to read the same message
twice, or b) them all having to come into mozilla.general and be
subjected to a flood of off-topic wibble. (This is by design; I'm not
objecting.) But neither is acceptable.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic Cancelling

Moz Champion (Dan)
In reply to this post by squaredancer
squaredancer wrote:

> On 27/02/2007 12:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gervase
> Markham to generate the following:? :
>> [Followup-To set to mozilla.governance; please respect it.]
>>
>> Summary:
>>
>> This is the start of a discussion as to when, if ever, it is
>> appropriate to cancel messages in the support groups
>> (mozilla.support.*). (We are not currently envisaging cancelling
>> non-spam messages anywhere else.) We may write a formal policy on the
>> matter.
>>
>> Background:
>>
>> A week or two ago, Chris Ilias approached me to ask whether he might
>> be permitted to cancel off-topic posts/threads in the support newsgroups.
>>
>> When we created the new newsgroups, we adopted a "wait and see" policy
>> to see if any sort of moderation or control was needed. Happily, in
>> the development groups at least, this has not proved necessary.
>>
>> However, as one of the people who looks after the support groups and
>> spends time answering questions, Chris feels that the same is not true
>> there. He has made several requests over a period of months to be
>> allowed to deal with the problem of particular prolific participants
>> posting pages of irrelevant chit-chat, even when requested not to. He
>> feels this makes the groups less useful for their intended purpose,
>> because users are put off and question-answerers are discouraged from
>> wading through it all.
>>
>> So, after discussion with Dave Miller, Dave gave him access to the
>> Giganews management console, and I sent him this:
>>
>> "Chris,
>>
>> If you take appropriate account of the "respected project contributor"
>> status of anyone involved, if you warn first (now that you have
>> something to back it up with) and cancel second, if you escalate the
>> amount of cancels gently as long as people don't learn their lesson,
>> then you may use this power for removing messages which are offtopic,
>> on the grounds that the more noise there is in the support newsgroups,
>> the less useful they are for support."
>>
>> Chris's first use of this power has caused something of a stir
>> (perhaps unsurprisingly) and accusations of "censorship". Following a
>> thread in mozilla.general, Deb Richardson has suggested that we have a
>> formal policy for this. This message is to start a thread to determine
>> what it might be.
>>
>> My suggestions will follow in a separate message.
>>
>> Gerv
>>  
> I would reply to this post but, as I am not subscribed to the FU group -
> and nor do I intend to - I will not be able to read any further replies
> by other posters!
>
> I would tend to presume that many other subscribers are in a similar
> situation!
>
> reg



You have been given the opportunity to participate in the discussion
pertaining to the subject matter. If you dont intend to subscribe to the
FU group, then you accept that you are not part of the discussion (and
ultimate decision reached thereof)

That the discussion will not be in this specific newsgroup
(mozilla.general) is as Gerv points out, a matter of being on-topic.

If you still dont intend to subscribe to the follow-up newsgroup
(mozilla.governance) then for all intents and purposes you should
refrain from discussion pertaining to the subject matter. You have your
chance, take it or dont, it's up to you.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic Cancelling

Terry R.
On 3/2/2007 4:53 AM On a whim, Moz Champion (Dan) pounded out on the
keyboard

> squaredancer wrote:
>> On 27/02/2007 12:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gervase
>> Markham to generate the following:? :
>>> [Followup-To set to mozilla.governance; please respect it.]
>>>
>>> Summary:
>>>
>>> This is the start of a discussion as to when, if ever, it is
>>> appropriate to cancel messages in the support groups
>>> (mozilla.support.*). (We are not currently envisaging cancelling
>>> non-spam messages anywhere else.) We may write a formal policy on the
>>> matter.
>>>
>>> Background:
>>>
>>> A week or two ago, Chris Ilias approached me to ask whether he might
>>> be permitted to cancel off-topic posts/threads in the support newsgroups.
>>>
>>> When we created the new newsgroups, we adopted a "wait and see" policy
>>> to see if any sort of moderation or control was needed. Happily, in
>>> the development groups at least, this has not proved necessary.
>>>
>>> However, as one of the people who looks after the support groups and
>>> spends time answering questions, Chris feels that the same is not true
>>> there. He has made several requests over a period of months to be
>>> allowed to deal with the problem of particular prolific participants
>>> posting pages of irrelevant chit-chat, even when requested not to. He
>>> feels this makes the groups less useful for their intended purpose,
>>> because users are put off and question-answerers are discouraged from
>>> wading through it all.
>>>
>>> So, after discussion with Dave Miller, Dave gave him access to the
>>> Giganews management console, and I sent him this:
>>>
>>> "Chris,
>>>
>>> If you take appropriate account of the "respected project contributor"
>>> status of anyone involved, if you warn first (now that you have
>>> something to back it up with) and cancel second, if you escalate the
>>> amount of cancels gently as long as people don't learn their lesson,
>>> then you may use this power for removing messages which are offtopic,
>>> on the grounds that the more noise there is in the support newsgroups,
>>> the less useful they are for support."
>>>
>>> Chris's first use of this power has caused something of a stir
>>> (perhaps unsurprisingly) and accusations of "censorship". Following a
>>> thread in mozilla.general, Deb Richardson has suggested that we have a
>>> formal policy for this. This message is to start a thread to determine
>>> what it might be.
>>>
>>> My suggestions will follow in a separate message.
>>>
>>> Gerv
>>>  
>> I would reply to this post but, as I am not subscribed to the FU group -
>> and nor do I intend to - I will not be able to read any further replies
>> by other posters!
>>
>> I would tend to presume that many other subscribers are in a similar
>> situation!
>>
>> reg
>
>
>
> You have been given the opportunity to participate in the discussion
> pertaining to the subject matter. If you dont intend to subscribe to the
> FU group, then you accept that you are not part of the discussion (and
> ultimate decision reached thereof)
>
> That the discussion will not be in this specific newsgroup
> (mozilla.general) is as Gerv points out, a matter of being on-topic.
>
> If you still dont intend to subscribe to the follow-up newsgroup
> (mozilla.governance) then for all intents and purposes you should
> refrain from discussion pertaining to the subject matter. You have your
> chance, take it or dont, it's up to you.

Hey Reg,

Look who's trying to be the new bully in town!

--
Terry
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic Cancelling

squaredancer
On 03/03/2007 01:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Terry to
generate the following:? :

> On 3/2/2007 4:53 AM On a whim, Moz Champion (Dan) pounded out on the
> keyboard
>
>  
>> squaredancer wrote:
>>    
>>> On 27/02/2007 12:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gervase
>>> Markham to generate the following:? :
>>>      
>>>> [Followup-To set to mozilla.governance; please respect it.]
>>>>
>>>> Summary:
>>>>
>>>> This is the start of a discussion as to when, if ever, it is
>>>> appropriate to cancel messages in the support groups
>>>> (mozilla.support.*). (We are not currently envisaging cancelling
>>>> non-spam messages anywhere else.) We may write a formal policy on the
>>>> matter.
>>>>
>>>> Background:
>>>>
>>>> A week or two ago, Chris Ilias approached me to ask whether he might
>>>> be permitted to cancel off-topic posts/threads in the support newsgroups.
>>>>
>>>> When we created the new newsgroups, we adopted a "wait and see" policy
>>>> to see if any sort of moderation or control was needed. Happily, in
>>>> the development groups at least, this has not proved necessary.
>>>>
>>>> However, as one of the people who looks after the support groups and
>>>> spends time answering questions, Chris feels that the same is not true
>>>> there. He has made several requests over a period of months to be
>>>> allowed to deal with the problem of particular prolific participants
>>>> posting pages of irrelevant chit-chat, even when requested not to. He
>>>> feels this makes the groups less useful for their intended purpose,
>>>> because users are put off and question-answerers are discouraged from
>>>> wading through it all.
>>>>
>>>> So, after discussion with Dave Miller, Dave gave him access to the
>>>> Giganews management console, and I sent him this:
>>>>
>>>> "Chris,
>>>>
>>>> If you take appropriate account of the "respected project contributor"
>>>> status of anyone involved, if you warn first (now that you have
>>>> something to back it up with) and cancel second, if you escalate the
>>>> amount of cancels gently as long as people don't learn their lesson,
>>>> then you may use this power for removing messages which are offtopic,
>>>> on the grounds that the more noise there is in the support newsgroups,
>>>> the less useful they are for support."
>>>>
>>>> Chris's first use of this power has caused something of a stir
>>>> (perhaps unsurprisingly) and accusations of "censorship". Following a
>>>> thread in mozilla.general, Deb Richardson has suggested that we have a
>>>> formal policy for this. This message is to start a thread to determine
>>>> what it might be.
>>>>
>>>> My suggestions will follow in a separate message.
>>>>
>>>> Gerv
>>>>  
>>>>        
>>> I would reply to this post but, as I am not subscribed to the FU group -
>>> and nor do I intend to - I will not be able to read any further replies
>>> by other posters!
>>>
>>> I would tend to presume that many other subscribers are in a similar
>>> situation!
>>>
>>> reg
>>>      
>>
>> You have been given the opportunity to participate in the discussion
>> pertaining to the subject matter. If you dont intend to subscribe to the
>> FU group, then you accept that you are not part of the discussion (and
>> ultimate decision reached thereof)
>>
>> That the discussion will not be in this specific newsgroup
>> (mozilla.general) is as Gerv points out, a matter of being on-topic.
>>
>> If you still dont intend to subscribe to the follow-up newsgroup
>> (mozilla.governance) then for all intents and purposes you should
>> refrain from discussion pertaining to the subject matter. You have your
>> chance, take it or dont, it's up to you.
>>    
>
> Hey Reg,
>
> Look who's trying to be the new bully in town!
>
>  
:-D  isn't "Dan, Dan the Moz-Champ man" that guy who resorts to
flame-wares when it comes to discussing JMC ???
Reckon, he'll be the first one to get bumped off the groups for
non-topic profanity *lol*

reg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic Cancelling

PhillipJones
squaredancer wrote:

> On 03/03/2007 01:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Terry to
> generate the following:? :
>> On 3/2/2007 4:53 AM On a whim, Moz Champion (Dan) pounded out on the
>> keyboard
>>
>>  
>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>    
>>>> On 27/02/2007 12:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gervase
>>>> Markham to generate the following:? :
>>>>      
>>>>> [Followup-To set to mozilla.governance; please respect it.]
>>>>>
>>>>> Summary:
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the start of a discussion as to when, if ever, it is
>>>>> appropriate to cancel messages in the support groups
>>>>> (mozilla.support.*). (We are not currently envisaging cancelling
>>>>> non-spam messages anywhere else.) We may write a formal policy on
>>>>> the matter.
>>>>>
>>>>> Background:
>>>>>
>>>>> A week or two ago, Chris Ilias approached me to ask whether he
>>>>> might be permitted to cancel off-topic posts/threads in the support
>>>>> newsgroups.
>>>>>
>>>>> When we created the new newsgroups, we adopted a "wait and see"
>>>>> policy to see if any sort of moderation or control was needed.
>>>>> Happily, in the development groups at least, this has not proved
>>>>> necessary.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, as one of the people who looks after the support groups
>>>>> and spends time answering questions, Chris feels that the same is
>>>>> not true there. He has made several requests over a period of
>>>>> months to be allowed to deal with the problem of particular
>>>>> prolific participants posting pages of irrelevant chit-chat, even
>>>>> when requested not to. He feels this makes the groups less useful
>>>>> for their intended purpose, because users are put off and
>>>>> question-answerers are discouraged from wading through it all.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, after discussion with Dave Miller, Dave gave him access to the
>>>>> Giganews management console, and I sent him this:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Chris,
>>>>>
>>>>> If you take appropriate account of the "respected project
>>>>> contributor" status of anyone involved, if you warn first (now that
>>>>> you have something to back it up with) and cancel second, if you
>>>>> escalate the amount of cancels gently as long as people don't learn
>>>>> their lesson, then you may use this power for removing messages
>>>>> which are offtopic, on the grounds that the more noise there is in
>>>>> the support newsgroups, the less useful they are for support."
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris's first use of this power has caused something of a stir
>>>>> (perhaps unsurprisingly) and accusations of "censorship". Following
>>>>> a thread in mozilla.general, Deb Richardson has suggested that we
>>>>> have a formal policy for this. This message is to start a thread to
>>>>> determine what it might be.
>>>>>
>>>>> My suggestions will follow in a separate message.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gerv
>>>>>          
>>>> I would reply to this post but, as I am not subscribed to the FU
>>>> group - and nor do I intend to - I will not be able to read any
>>>> further replies by other posters!
>>>>
>>>> I would tend to presume that many other subscribers are in a similar
>>>> situation!
>>>>
>>>> reg
>>>>      
>>>
>>> You have been given the opportunity to participate in the discussion
>>> pertaining to the subject matter. If you dont intend to subscribe to
>>> the FU group, then you accept that you are not part of the discussion
>>> (and ultimate decision reached thereof)
>>>
>>> That the discussion will not be in this specific newsgroup
>>> (mozilla.general) is as Gerv points out, a matter of being on-topic.
>>>
>>> If you still dont intend to subscribe to the follow-up newsgroup
>>> (mozilla.governance) then for all intents and purposes you should
>>> refrain from discussion pertaining to the subject matter. You have
>>> your chance, take it or dont, it's up to you.
>>>    
>>
>> Hey Reg,
>>
>> Look who's trying to be the new bully in town!
>>
>>  
> :-D  isn't "Dan, Dan the Moz-Champ man" that guy who resorts to
> flame-wares when it comes to discussing JMC ???
> Reckon, he'll be the first one to get bumped off the groups for
> non-topic profanity *lol*
>
> reg
That might Gall him if they did. :-D

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET                                http://www.vpea.org
If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!            mailto:[hidden email]
                              http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm
Mac G4-500, OSX.3.9                Mac 17" PowerBook G4-1.67 Gb, OSX.4.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic Cancelling

Brian Heinrich-3
In reply to this post by squaredancer
On 2007-03-03 07:12 (-0700 UTC), squaredancer wrote:

<snip />

> :-D  isn't "Dan, Dan the Moz-Champ man" that guy who resorts to
> flame-wares when it comes to discussing JMC ???
> Reckon, he'll be the first one to get bumped off the groups for
> non-topic profanity *lol*

IME, it is rare that Dan resorts to profanity, masked or otherwise; he's
much more likely to impugn others' reading skills, &c.

/b.

--
String quartets don't march very well.
                                        --Donald Barthelme, /The Dead Father/
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Peter Lairo-4
In reply to this post by Gervase Markham
Michael Lefevre wrote on 06.03.2007 12:38:
> On 2007-03-06, Gervase Markham <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Peter Lairo wrote:
>>> Ignore (kill) a Subthread (branch: not the whole thread) (Troll)
>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11054
>> Yes, that would definitely be a good feature. But the Thunderbird team
>> are pretty stretched; someone needs to step up to the plate.
>
> Setting followups to mozilla.general cause I think Peter's plugging of one
> of his pet bugs is taking us off the topic of cancelling OT stuff :)

Michael: I think you made a mistake. I mentioned that bug here, not
because I want it fixed for me (I rarely do support, or read trollish
newsgroups), but because I think it would *greatly reduce* (perhaps even
eliminate!) the need for the whole "Support Newsgroup Off-topic
canceling" discussion.

> Implementing that feature wouldn't be much use for the Firefox support
> group - lots of posters there are using Outlook Express or Google groups,
> so enhancing Thunderbird is not going to help newsgroup newbies to ignore
> the OT stuff.

Au contraire. The "Ignore a Subthread" feature would benefit the
*supporters* (who presumably mostly use a newsreader) not the
*supportees* (who generally pop in, ask their question, get an answer,
and leave). Just look around the Microsoft newsgroups
(news://msnews.microsoft.com:119/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general):
The *vast* majority of threads is only an average of two posts deep! The
*supportees* are almost completely unaffected by OT threads because they
never/hardly look at other threads.

The *supporters* need an efficient and non-destructive way to minimize
their time spent on OT (sub)threads. Bug 11054 would allow supporters to
ignore an entire OT (sub)thread with the click of a button, as opposed
to deleting the thread for all (which presumably involves more steps)
*and* potentially pissing off (or treating unfairly) the poster(s).

Add benefit: *After* a bug had been resolved for the supportee, the
"regulars" could hijack that thread and have a very deep discussion
about ... say ... German beer, without bothering the other supporters
(who just SHIFT+k kill the sub-thread). :-)

*Now* setting FU to mozilla.general for reconsideration by others. Bye.
--
Regards,

Peter Lairo

Lame attempt to get rich: http://www.lairo.com/donations.html
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

squaredancer
On 06/03/2007 13:39, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Peter Lairo to
generate the following:? :

> Michael Lefevre wrote on 06.03.2007 12:38:
>  
>> On 2007-03-06, Gervase Markham <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>    
>>> Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>      
>>>> Ignore (kill) a Subthread (branch: not the whole thread) (Troll)
>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11054
>>>>        
>>> Yes, that would definitely be a good feature. But the Thunderbird team
>>> are pretty stretched; someone needs to step up to the plate.
>>>      
<<snipped>>

> Au contraire. The "Ignore a Subthread" feature would benefit the
> *supporters* (who presumably mostly use a newsreader) not the
> *supportees* (who generally pop in, ask their question, get an answer,
> and leave).

Yout "supportees" theory makes ChrisI point moot, that the actual
"support usage" is being deserted due to OT-noise...  in fact, *very
few* posts (OP with original support request) goes unanswered - and that
answer is *usually* put out before the SUB-Threaded OT discussion
begins.  Or has *ANYONE* seen a support request *ignored* and swamped by
some OT noise??
> Just look around the Microsoft newsgroups
>  
<<snipped>>
>  The *supportees* are almost completely unaffected by OT threads because they
> never/hardly look at other threads.
>  

also, so *very true* here!
> The *supporters* need an efficient and non-destructive way to minimize
> their time spent on OT (sub)threads. Bug 11054 would allow supporters to
> ignore an entire OT (sub)thread with the click of a button, as opposed
> to deleting the thread for all (which presumably involves more steps)
> *and* potentially pissing off (or treating unfairly) the poster(s).
>  

And - to be honest.... do those poor souls know about the "r" key on
their keyboard.... then it's about time they *learned* how TB works -
obviously much more efficiently than pre-dinosaur Newsreaders!
> Add benefit: *After* a bug had been resolved for the supportee, the
> "regulars" could hijack that thread and have a very deep discussion
> about ... say ... German beer, without bothering the other supporters
> (who just SHIFT+k kill the sub-thread). :-)
>  

Ah, yes!  German beer..... now, just what were you saying....  :-D


reg

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Peter Lairo-3
squaredancer said on 6.3.2007 17:26:

> On 06/03/2007 13:39, CET - Peter Lairo:
>> Michael Lefevre wrote on 06.03.2007 12:38:
>>> On 2007-03-06, Gervase Markham <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>>      
>>>>> Ignore (kill) a Subthread (branch: not the whole thread) (Troll)
>>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11054
>>>>>        
>> Au contraire. The "Ignore a Subthread" feature would benefit the
>> *supporters* (who presumably mostly use a newsreader) not the
>> *supportees* (who generally pop in, ask their question, get an answer,
>> and leave).
>
> Your "supportees" theory makes ChrisI point moot,

Exactly! I also think Chris is too fixated on this OT-non-problem.

>> The *supporters* need an efficient and non-destructive way to minimize
>> their time spent on OT (sub)threads. Bug 11054 would allow supporters
>> to ignore an entire OT (sub)thread with the click of a button, as
>> opposed to deleting the thread for all (which presumably involves more
>> steps) *and* potentially pissing off (or treating unfairly) the
>> poster(s).
>
> And - to be honest.... do those poor souls know about the "r" key on
> their keyboard....

Actually, the R-key marks the *whole thread* as read, whereas the user
might want to still read another part of the thread. The best solution
would be the ability to mark a *sub* thread as read or as ignored.
--
Regards,

Peter Lairo

The browser you can trust:   www.GetFirefox.com
Reclaim Your Inbox:          www.GetThunderbird.com
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Brian Heinrich-3
In reply to this post by Peter Lairo-4
On 2007-03-06 05:39 (-0700 UTC), Peter Lairo wrote:

> Michael Lefevre wrote on 06.03.2007 12:38:
>> On 2007-03-06, Gervase Markham <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>> Ignore (kill) a Subthread (branch: not the whole thread) (Troll)
>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11054
>>> Yes, that would definitely be a good feature. But the Thunderbird
>>> team are pretty stretched; someone needs to step up to the plate.
>>
>> Setting followups to mozilla.general cause I think Peter's plugging of
>> one
>> of his pet bugs is taking us off the topic of cancelling OT stuff :)
>
> Michael: I think you made a mistake. I mentioned that bug here, not
> because I want it fixed for me (I rarely do support, or read trollish
> newsgroups), but because I think it would *greatly reduce* (perhaps even
> eliminate!) the need for the whole "Support Newsgroup Off-topic
> canceling" discussion.

Hey, Peter: -- The utility of the functionality doesn't stop it from being
one of your pet bugs. :-P

I agree that being able to kill a branch of a thread a good idea and that it
would benefit those who provide support on these groups (and, yes, that
would include those of us who do from time to time engage in OT discussion
:-P ), but, really, if people were in fact marking OT discussion as such,
wouldn't it be just as easy to create a filter to mark those as read and not
download the headers for them?

IOW, I suspect that utility of the function is at least /in part/ predicated
on people not marking OT discussion as such.  Yes, it can be over-looked,
but if posters were more conscious -- if not conscientious -- about it, it
might be possible to minimise the s/probability/possibility/ that OT
discussion will spiral out of control without being marked as such.

One factor in all of this that neither your pet bug nor my suggestions
regarding more conscientious practice on the part of posters would not
address is that at least some posters subscribe /via/ a mailing list. . . .

<snip />

> Add benefit: *After* a bug had been resolved for the supportee, the
> "regulars" could hijack that thread and have a very deep discussion
> about ... say ... German beer, without bothering the other supporters
> (who just SHIFT+k kill the sub-thread). :-)

Hey hey hey -- I don't think there's been a good discussion of beer since
Parish's time (when he was still involved with FreeBSD) . . . but I do
wonder why Altbier is so hard to come by in Alberta (my father spent most of
the War in Düsseldorf). :-P

> *Now* setting FU to mozilla.general for reconsideration by others. Bye.

/b.

--
String quartets don't march very well.
                                        --Donald Barthelme, /The Dead Father/
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
In reply to this post by Peter Lairo-3
Peter Lairo wrote:
> Actually, the R-key marks the *whole thread* as read, whereas the user
> might want to still read another part of the thread. The best solution
> would be the ability to mark a *sub* thread as read or as ignored.

what I do is color code that part of the thread I'm not
interested in.  I just highlight everything in that sub
thread and hit the 3 key, and everything is now green.  If
anything comes between those greenies ones or after them,
then I mark it as read and color them too. Simple!

--
Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/46347-Peter_Potamus_Show.html
http://www.toonarific.com/show.php?s_search=Potamus&Button_Update=Search&show_id=2778

Please do not email me for help.  Reply to the newsgroup
only.  Thanks
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Peter Lairo-3
In reply to this post by Brian Heinrich-3
Brian Heinrich said on 6.3.2007 22:11:

> On 2007-03-06 05:39 (-0700 UTC), Peter Lairo wrote:
>
>> Michael Lefevre wrote on 06.03.2007 12:38:
>>> On 2007-03-06, Gervase Markham <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>>> Ignore (kill) a Subthread (branch: not the whole thread) (Troll)
>>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11054
>>>> Yes, that would definitely be a good feature. But the Thunderbird
>>>> team are pretty stretched; someone needs to step up to the plate.
>>>
>>> Setting followups to mozilla.general cause I think Peter's plugging
>>> of one
>>> of his pet bugs is taking us off the topic of cancelling OT stuff :)
>>
>> Michael: I think you made a mistake. I mentioned that bug here, not
>> because I want it fixed for me (I rarely do support, or read trollish
>> newsgroups), but because I think it would *greatly reduce* (perhaps
>> even eliminate!) the need for the whole "Support Newsgroup Off-topic
>> canceling" discussion.
>
> Hey, Peter: -- The utility of the functionality doesn't stop it from
> being one of your pet bugs. :-P

Likewise, the fact that it may be a pet bug doesn't stop it from being
very useful for dealing with OT sub-threads. :-P

> I agree that being able to kill a branch of a thread a good idea and
> that it would benefit those who provide support on these groups (and,
> yes, that would include those of us who do from time to time engage in
> OT discussion :-P ), but, really, if people were in fact marking OT
> discussion as such, wouldn't it be just as easy to create a filter to
> mark those as read and not download the headers for them?

No. Creating a filter is significantly more difficult than pressing a
key combination (e.g., SHIFT+K). Also, what would you filter on?

> IOW, I suspect that utility of the function is at least /in part/
> predicated on people not marking OT discussion as such.  Yes, it can be
> over-looked, but if posters were more conscious -- if not conscientious
> -- about it, it might be possible to minimise the
> s/probability/possibility/ that OT discussion will spiral out of control
> without being marked as such.

Huh???

> One factor in all of this that neither your pet bug nor my suggestions
> regarding more conscientious practice on the part of posters would not
> address is that at least some posters subscribe /via/ a mailing list. . . .

It's a *newsgroup* (so little sympathy from me). Let them demand of
their e-mail program to deal with that.
--
Regards,

Peter Lairo

The browser you can trust:   www.GetFirefox.com
Reclaim Your Inbox:          www.GetThunderbird.com
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Zak Hipp
In reply to this post by Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:

> Peter Lairo wrote:
>> Actually, the R-key marks the *whole thread* as read, whereas the user
>> might want to still read another part of the thread. The best solution
>> would be the ability to mark a *sub* thread as read or as ignored.
>
> what I do is color code that part of the thread I'm not interested in.  
> I just highlight everything in that sub thread and hit the 3 key, and
> everything is now green.  If anything comes between those greenies ones
> or after them, then I mark it as read and color them too. Simple!
>

How interesting. I've read nearly all posts since Oct-06 and filter nothing. Perhaps oddly, I'm finding that 'Nir',
yourself and a couple of others, are becoming much sort after posts. Keep digging out those gems.

Zak Hipp
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
Zak Hipp wrote:

> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>> Peter Lairo wrote:
>>> Actually, the R-key marks the *whole thread* as read, whereas the
>>> user might want to still read another part of the thread. The best
>>> solution would be the ability to mark a *sub* thread as read or as
>>> ignored.
>>
>> what I do is color code that part of the thread I'm not interested
>> in.  I just highlight everything in that sub thread and hit the 3 key,
>> and everything is now green.  If anything comes between those greenies
>> ones or after them, then I mark it as read and color them too. Simple!
>>
>
> How interesting. I've read nearly all posts since Oct-06 and filter
> nothing. Perhaps oddly, I'm finding that 'Nir', yourself and a couple of
> others, are becoming much sort after posts. Keep digging out those gems.
>
> Zak Hipp

well, for me I'm not interested in linux or mac threads, so
those are out automatically -- they become green. Then in
the FF, there is the thread about Bottom Posting.  Well,
after awhile, the OT started on the just Greened those, too.
  Some I've kept, but not all.  Its the same in TB.  The
tread was TB getting you black listed.  That thread, too,
has half normal and the other half is greened out.  And then
another part is in Orange.  Those are the messages that came
after my posting and I'll keep my eye on them. In the thread
about "Signatures starting with -- " its the same thing.
After a while, I lost interest.  I saw the OT and when the
subject changed, so I followed that, but after awhile,
again, I lost interest so the rest became greened out, but
I've kept some and I'll be following those.

To me this is simple and I don't know why others don't do
the same.

--
Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/46347-Peter_Potamus_Show.html
http://www.toonarific.com/show.php?s_search=Potamus&Button_Update=Search&show_id=2778

Please do not email me for help.  Reply to the newsgroup
only.  Thanks
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Brian Heinrich-3
In reply to this post by Peter Lairo-3
On 2007-03-06 14:54 (-0700 UTC), Peter Lairo wrote:

> Brian Heinrich said on 6.3.2007 22:11:
>> On 2007-03-06 05:39 (-0700 UTC), Peter Lairo wrote:

<snip />

>>> I mentioned that bug here, not
>>> because I want it fixed for me (I rarely do support, or read trollish
>>> newsgroups), but because I think it would *greatly reduce* (perhaps
>>> even eliminate!) the need for the whole "Support Newsgroup Off-topic
>>> canceling" discussion.
>>
>> Hey, Peter: -- The utility of the functionality doesn't stop it from
>> being one of your pet bugs. :-P
>
> Likewise, the fact that it may be a pet bug doesn't stop it from being
> very useful for dealing with OT sub-threads. :-P

And around and around we go. . . . :-D

>> I agree that being able to kill a branch of a thread a good idea and
>> that it would benefit those who provide support on these groups (and,
>> yes, that would include those of us who do from time to time engage in
>> OT discussion :-P ), but, really, if people were in fact marking OT
>> discussion as such, wouldn't it be just as easy to create a filter to
>> mark those as read and not download the headers for them?
>
> No. Creating a filter is significantly more difficult than pressing a
> key combination (e.g., SHIFT+K).

Fair 'nuff.  (I just had to create a virtual folder in order to compensate
for something that should pro'ly be offered in the UI.)

> Also, what would you filter on?

If people were marking OT postings with |[OT]|, then you'd just filter on
|[OT]|.

>> IOW, I suspect that utility of the function is at least /in part/
>> predicated on people not marking OT discussion as such.  Yes, it can
>> be over-looked, but if posters were more conscious -- if not
>> conscientious -- about it, it might be possible to minimise the
>> s/probability/possibility/ that OT discussion will spiral out of
>> control without being marked as such.
>
> Huh???

If posters were more clearly marking OT discussion as such, it would be
easier to filter against it for those who are disinterested.

However, PPtPH has made an interesting case for the application of labels to
achieve that part of that functionality.  (A kludgey work-around, to be
sure, but interesting none the less because it would allow one to create a
filter:

(IF   Subject contains |OT|
(THEN Tag Message [Tag]
(AND  Ignore Thread

(So you'd (/e.g./) create a tag outside of the nine that can be activated
using number keys (0 removing all tags) and use that to tag OT messages.)

Granted, this isn't as refined as being able to kill a branch of a thread at
a click . . . but you managed to convince of the utility of your pet bug
several years ago. :-P

>> One factor in all of this that neither your pet bug nor my suggestions
>> regarding more conscientious practice on the part of posters would not
>> address is that at least some posters subscribe /via/ a mailing list.
>> . . .
>
> It's a *newsgroup* (so little sympathy from me). Let them demand of
> their e-mail program to deal with that.

While I agree, I would say that so long as mailing lists are one way in
which to access these groups, it's neither fair nor right to dismiss them
entirely. . . .

--
/b.

String quartets don't march very well.
                                        --Donald Barthelme, /The Dead Father/
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Gervase Markham
In reply to this post by Peter Lairo-3
Peter Lairo wrote:
> squaredancer said on 6.3.2007 17:26:
>> Your "supportees" theory makes ChrisI point moot,
>
> Exactly! I also think Chris is too fixated on this OT-non-problem.

Currently, mozilla.support.firefox is running at 100 messages a day. So
if you come in to ask a question, and it takes 48 hours to get your
question answered, you end up with a mailbox of 198 unwanted messages.
Anything which reduces this is a good thing.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Michael Lefevre
In reply to this post by Peter Lairo-4
On 2007-03-06, Peter Lairo <"Peter AhT Lairo DOhT com"> wrote:
[snip]
>> Implementing that feature wouldn't be much use for the Firefox support
>> group - lots of posters there are using Outlook Express or Google groups,
>> so enhancing Thunderbird is not going to help newsgroup newbies to ignore
>> the OT stuff.
>
> Au contraire. The "Ignore a Subthread" feature would benefit the
> *supporters* (who presumably mostly use a newsreader) not the
> *supportees* (who generally pop in, ask their question, get an answer,
> and leave).

That doesn't really contradict what I said, which is that it wouldn't help
supportees.  The original point of this, AIUI, is to help supportees.
You're trying to solve the wrong problem.

> The *supporters* need an efficient and non-destructive way to minimize
> their time spent on OT (sub)threads. Bug 11054 [...]

Actually the supporters don't seem to be bothered by the OT stuff (indeed,
many of them are participating in it).

--
Michael
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Support Newsgroup Off-topic canceling

Tony Mechelynck
In reply to this post by Gervase Markham
Gervase Markham wrote:

> Peter Lairo wrote:
>> squaredancer said on 6.3.2007 17:26:
>>> Your "supportees" theory makes ChrisI point moot,
>>
>> Exactly! I also think Chris is too fixated on this OT-non-problem.
>
> Currently, mozilla.support.firefox is running at 100 messages a day. So
> if you come in to ask a question, and it takes 48 hours to get your
> question answered, you end up with a mailbox of 198 unwanted messages.
> Anything which reduces this is a good thing.
>
> Gerv

Well, yes; but this points to another problem: 100 messages a day in a
newsgroup are still manageable. 100 messages a day in one's Inbox is much more
difficult to handle, even with email filtering (I mean, moving incoming
messages to various "subfolders" of Local Folders depending on who sent them,
or what mailing list they belong to).

Best regards,
Tony.
--
TV is chewing gum for the eyes.
                -- Frank Lloyd Wright
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
1234 ... 7