[6569] in java-interest
Rejected by Custodian
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (PM_SMTP_RGW)
Thu Apr 4 11:02:40 1996
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 16:24:15 U
Reply-To: Java Interest <JAVA-INTEREST@JAVASOFT.COM>
From: PM_SMTP_RGW <PM#u#SMTP#u#RGW@QMSMTPGW.MUGU.NAVY.MIL>
To: Multiple recipients of list JAVA-INTEREST
<JAVA-INTEREST@JAVASOFT.COM>
Mail*Link(r) SMTP RE>Trouble in Java land
> Kursad Keskinege wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 31 Mar 1996, Michael Mehrle wrote:
> >
> > > Hellooo Sun, get the message!!
> > >
> > > Even the creators of the language are fed up with this sorry excuse for
a
> > > mailing list. And Arthur is not the only one contemplating with getting
off
> > > the list. However, the e-mail below really alarmed me, since Athur's
advice
> > > - as one of the founders of the language - has been invaluable to the
> > > development of our Java community.
> > >
> > > Can't we just work together a little to give this alias back its
purpose?
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> > people,
> > this is true nature of this kind of topics in the net.
> > Solutions to this problem for several days are as follows:
> > 1. moderate the list. needs a good volunteer.
> > 2. put the rules, and apply them to all of the users, such as:
> > a) send mails in topics, like
> > INFO: for your info, announcement of a new site
> > SUMMARY: java window error
> > QUESTION: awt class documnetation
> > topics can be extended when needed to..
> > b) do not send any answers to questions directly to the list.
> > rather use, direct mail. But the question asker MUST summarize everything
> > and send in a SUMMARY file.
> >
> > please think about it, before continuing to discuss java, and exchange
> > info, we must rearrange the list to make Hoff to come back.
> >
> > best wishes,
> > Kursad Keskinege, Ege
kursad@ege.edu.tr
> > Network Group, EgeNET Services Coordinator
http://www.ege.net.tr
> > KIDLINK WWW Coordinator
http://www.kidlink.org
> > Web Admin of http://www.ege.edu.tr home:
http://www.ege.edu.tr/~keskineg
>
>
> I like your idea, but I think that people SHOULD reply the
> answers to the list because some other people might want to know the
> answers. So, there should also be a topic: ANSWER:
>
> Just my thoughts........
>
>
> jkmissig@voicenet.com
> Visit my homepage: http://www.voicenet.com/~nmissig/
>
Actually, I think I would rather see the summary than to see 6 different
replys about how to test an object for null. The problems I see with this
are:
a) The people who join the group need to know the protocall.
b) They also have to conform (i.e. send out the summary)
a) is easy -- just send out a list of the rules when they subscribe, but
b) is a bit more difficult.
I have found this group to be extremly usefull even with the problems of
the duplicate replys and the server sending out the same response multiple
times. And if it's to go :+( so be it. I would still like to thank
the people who have put the time and effort into running the whole affair.
My thoughts ...
Steve Smith
