[Coco] This tickles me.... Update!.. It ain't so bad...
georgeramsower at gmail.com
Fri Oct 24 01:14:26 EDT 2008
If you haven't read my previous post, please read the quoted part first.
I took the little time it takes to figure this...
I checked the count at this month's messages at 346. Then I deleted all
the BS that was NOT coco related and the result was 258 messages.
That's only 88 messages! ( My decision on that). I'm probably not exactly
in-tune with everyone on that. I did delete all messages that I was involved
wiith, just to be sure I had no bias in this simple test.
I suppose this isn't as bad as it appeared at first, because the related
massages aren't as loud as the BS... if you choose to read the BS.
I don't, usually. However, 88 BS messages out of 346 results in about one
in four messages that we could do without.
It ain't so bad.
> I'm amused at what sometimes happens here on the Coco list.
> When we begin talking about topics not directly related to COCOS this list
> sometimes develops some differences of opinions and escelates into some
> sour notes being exchanged.
> It is normal for folks to have disagreements on topics. However, this
> shouldn't happen on this Coco list because, most always, the topics aren't
> even Coco topics.
> I'm fairly sure this stuff wouldn't happen as often if we could keep the
> subjects in line with the directive of this list group.
> It's difficult to argue about how we go about working with a Coco. All the
> arguments have been discussed for many years and are finally settled.
> Linux, Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Ford and Chevy and the weather have nothing
> to do with this list. Not even politics and the economy have anything to
> do with this list.
> What tickles me is when someone says "Shut UP, already!" yhen, suddenly
> there is almost no traffic at all. This implies that there is too much
> traffic on OFF TOPIC discussions on the Coco listgroup..
> Personally, I wasn't even following the last topic that resulted in sour
> notes until just out of curiosity, I opened one of the last messages in
> that discussion to find that folks were exchanging very clever blows at
> each other. It's sad but, I was impressed how the verbiage was well
> Perhaps we could improve this listgroup if we worked dilligently at trying
> to keep it directly related to a Coco.
> I betcha that whatever off topic discussion we get into has a listgroup on
> that topic somewhere else, having the same debate.
> I would think it wouldn't be too difficult to find that listgroup, join up
> and carry on there.
> Whucha say? Can we work on this?
More information about the Coco