[vworld-tech] SNR (was VWorld Axioms)

[Dave]

Mailing lists are not the place to publish technical papers.

ceo wrote:

> Crosbie Fitch wrote:
> >>From: ceo
> >>The way I interpreted the comment was that "axioms of vw" is a
> >
> >
> > It is possible that in order to better discuss technological issues 
> impinging upon virtual worlds that one first defines the technological 
> foundations underlying such virtual worlds.
> >
> > Would it not be sensible to keep that discussion in the same list as 
> discusses technology built upon those foundations?
> >
>
> I didn't think it would need spelling out: the majority of people who 
> are interested in those things, and those who are experienced in them, 
> are MD subscribers. Few of them are also subscribers on this list.
>
> If you want to have a meaningful conversation on a topic, you generaly 
> go to wherever the people are who know about the topic and understand it.
>
> I would not recommend attempting to discuss vworld-tech on a 
> Quake-fest IRC channel; yes, there are likely to be some there with a 
> passing interest, perhaps some with a strong interest. Most of them 
> will have nothing to add to your conversation (assuming you have more 
> than a passing interest yourself).
>
> > There are also discussions concerned with what should or shouldn't be
> > discussed, with what a mailing list's charter is, in spite of a dearth
> > of discussion, in spite of risking alienating those participants who
> > dare contribute something they believe to be interesting and on-topic.
>
> This is silly; all I did was to point out that a long-running topic 
> had basically gone nowhere. With the benefit of hindsight, I was able 
> to generalize on it's content and direction. Nobody is assasinating 
> someone just for "daring to contribute".
>
> You seem to imply that you'd prefer a list where bad threads get 
> worse, until people start unsubscribing in large numbers because the 
> list is just so much crud, because no-one is going to say anything 
> when the SNR becomes vanishingly small.
>
> > Perhaps if it is not patently clear to all that something is off-topic,
> > that if in these times of sparse contribution, 'waffly' or 'whimsical
> > prattling' posts can be given the benefit of the doubt?
>
> 1. "times of sparse contribution" is never an excuse for bad posts
>
> 2. I gave several streams of posts "the benefit of the doubt" in order 
> to see where they went. I voiced concern only after it became plain 
> they weren't actually going anywhere.
>
> > If anything, posts accusing others of 'waffling' or 'whimsical 
> prattling'
> > should probably be deprecated.
>
> c.f. my previous points.
>
> >
> > I would be surprised if this mailing list is currently aiming for 
> the same
> > editorial standards as perhaps an editor might require for
> > contributions to a book entitled 'Virtual World Technology Gems - I'.
>
> Your comment would make more sense to me if, for instance, I'd 
> embarked on a crusade to homogenize spellings of the words "whilst" 
> and "while" in others' posts. It seems out of place in response to a 
> request for more signal and less noise.
>
> PS either the listserver is bust or you need a new email client - your 
> posts are coming in unwrapped, forcing me to manually fix the 
> formatting before replying.
>
> Adam
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>vworld-tech mailing list
>vworld-tech at cubik.org
>http://lists.cubik.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vworld-tech
>  
>