Re: Keeping working groups open: Was Re: A non response ...

[Richard Kooijman <[e-mail]>]

> The only weakness is that the community continues to tolerate pointless
> messages of little or no redeeming value.  Unfortunately, it is
> impossible to mandate good taste or professional responsibility.
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

And look who says this.


> The
> problem is not that people with "competent, but perhaps not completely
> perfectly formed, comments" are discouraged from speaking.  The problem
> is that some people who could contribute competent comments do not do
> so, but instead send pointless messages to multiple mailing lists.


And you are an objective source for deciding what is pointless or not,
I assume?

Why don't you form your own mailing list and leave this one for those
of us who send nothing but pointless messages?

I thought your idea was to get things working and not to discuss them
endlessly. So, what if someone asks or says something that is obvious to
the rest of us. Maybe we can help, maybe we (you) will flame the person.
So what? Only a click on your next button/function in your mail handler
is required. Most of the discussions here are of some value to a lot of
people. It is surprising to see, you mail so few flaming responses.
It appears you do have something better to do.

Don't have a cow, man.
		-- Bart Simpson


Richard.