Re: Purging schedules

["Roger B.A. Klorese" <rogerk @ queernet . org>]

Beartooth wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
> > For a particular type of list, they do something very positive:
> > chase away slackers and lurkers.  If you're interested in having
> > smaller lists of high participation, pestering people with
> > reconfirmation requests makes it likely the less interested will
> > just go away.  For community lists, that's a very good thing.
> >   
>
> 	Why? What harm do slackers and lurkers do? And what's the
> difference between them? I don't even know for sure what a slacker
> is, in this context, except that you seem to imply equating
> participation with production. I distinguish them.
That's fine for many, even most, lists.

We host a few where the goal is comunity, even "jabber," not technical
or focused discussion.  The owners of some of these lists even impose a
minimum daily or weekly posting requirement; others don't go so far,
but want to make it clear to everyone that if they intend to stick
around and overhear what others are saying it requires a deliberate
"allow me to stay in the room even if I'm not talking" process.
> 	Am I missing a problem? Or are jokes somehow different from
> the kinds of contributions to lists you had in mind? Or does the
> worker just resent the drone? <grin>
They are indeed different.