Partly on Posting limits Plus Plenty of Rambling

[KathyK]

I was just going to discuss the 3-a-day experiment.  Honest!

Valky wrote:

>but past measures (OTChatter - FAQ) have kept a total crisis at bay 
for quite some time now. I think we should measure our success by 
how well we embrace it, not by how politically correctly we stifle 
it. Am I really alone on that?<

KathyK: 

No, Valky, you're not alone.  I see your point and I agree to an 
extent.  The rest of this isn't directed at you, but is more a 
general response to this and past discussions.  I know you have made 
a suggestion, as have others, for the creation of separate lists 
for 'higher-quality' discussion with, as Carolyn & Barry suggested 
as one of their solutions, stricter guidelines for posting to said 
lists.  Such lists would help lower volume on the main list and give 
posters who have placed a great amount of time and effort into their 
messages somewhere to post with the expectation of not just any 
reply, but of well constructed and considered replies.  

My issue with this, besides my usual dislike for anything that to me 
smacks of elitism, (regardless of whether such was the intent), is 
how exactly would this help improve quality on the main list?  How 
will removing the well supported and thought-provoking posts to 
another place encourage posters on the main list to post well 
supported and thought-provoking messages?  

I love the suggestion of Topic Posts, Guest Posts, and Revisiting 
Old Posts.  I tire quite quickly of a few oft-repeated subjects.  
Infusing the list with some great discussion on a range of topics 
would be most excellent.  I'd love to help in any way I can in 
implementing some of these ideas.  (Er, Elfly-types, speaking of 
helping in any way I can, did you receive my reply message I sent 
last week?)

Considerations of Other Suggestions:

***I am firmly against preventing new members joining from June-
August.  If such a measure were in place when I tried to join in 
JUNE, I would have said, "forget you people," never to return.  Not 
a big loss for this list, I'm sure, but there's that whole "you're 
more likely to tell people about a bad experience than a good one" 
so this sort of measure, according to my knowledge (limited to me, 
but what can I say?  It's all I've got), would just lead to a lot of 
bad feelings and could create a negative reputation for HPFGU, which 
I would hate to see happen since this place really is great!  Not to 
mention potential excellent posters we'd be missing out on.  

I am against any measure that seems to punish someone because they 
happened to discover HP later than others.  That being said, having 
a new member wait for contact from a Welcome Elf seems not an 
unreasonable request.  

***The delayed posting method seems a bit too drastic, too difficult 
to implement, and again, there's that objection others have brought 
up about filtering posts not just for formatting issues or errors 
but also for substance.  That's just too much, IMO.  

***Like Carolyn, I am all for list elves contributing more to 
threads and leading by example.  It's something I believe I've 
mentioned before so I won't harp on it now.

Pippin:

>>One thing I'd be  glad to have input on is how we would measure 
success. Posting quality seems too subjective to be measured 
easily.<< 

KathyK:

I'll admit, lowering message volume appeals to me.  A limit on the 
number of messages per day a member may post is something I've 
advocated in the past.  The more I think on it, though, it may be 
I've been such a huge fan of it because I could use fewer posts to 
read through at times.  So I'm thinking on it some more.

It certainly is a means of controlling list volume, something that 
is going to be extremely important this summer.  I joined HPFGU in 
June 2003 right before OOP's release.  I had no concept of this list 
before OOP.  I just thought this place was a madhouse and I'd have 
to get used to it. :-)  And I said, "Wow, there are almost 60,000 
messages already.  I'll never catch up with those."  It was 
difficult enough keeping up with current threads.  Yeah.  What was 
my point?  Probably didn't even have one.

The measure of success.  Tammy mentioned the cold, hard, facts 
answer.  If posting volume is reduced then presumably the 3 a day 
experiment is a success.  Even that, though, is not so cut and dry 
in my opinion.  What numbers are you comparing it with?  The numbers 
from the preceding month, from the same month in previous years?  

Then there's the quality factor Pippin mentioned.  Will the limit 
really encourage more thoughtful posts?  Will it encourage longer 
posts?  Will it cause members to weave together many posts on one 
thread into one response rather than one reply message per reply 
message?  Will it cut down on what Geoff once termed "tennis" 
replies, the back and forth arguments that never go anywhere (one of 
my pet peeves)?  While posting quality is a subjective measure(whose 
definition of quality or good posts do we use?) it is something I 
think must be considered in some way for this experiment.  I don't 
have an answer as how to gauge this.  I might just look to see if 
there is a discernable difference in how people are posting 
overall.  There again, is that something that can be quantified or 
put to use in giving an answer to the success question?  

Pippin, have you any initial ideas on what you'll be looking for in 
this experiment?  


KathyK, who could ramble more but it will probably just be 
repetitive and anyway it's 5am here and Kathy needs to be up in 4 
hours