[clue-tech] List is back?

[David L. Willson]

I meant that S/N is higher ~now~, than it was when the one list started. I agree that it started out pretty cruddy, and a lot of folks wandered off.

But, Dave A dropped the hammer, and he and Dennis and I had a late discussion on "containment protocol", and I'm pretty sure it'll stay mostly clean from here on out.

~Just~ lurking is leeching, pretty much by definition. There's ~always~ a way to pay back, and pay forward, what you get from CLUE, and CLUE ~needs~ help. It is a volunteer organization. So yeah, anyone that's getting value from CLUE, and not giving something back to CLUE, whether it's help for the newbies, cash for dinners & hosting, administrative help, web-space, or whatever... is leeching, pretty much by definition. Now, leeching isn't all bad. A few hundred leeches makes for a good audience. But a few hundred that can say "Thank you" in some tangible way, is much, much better, and leads to a more vibrant club. And this is a club, not just a free tech-support service.

Free software isn't free, like Freedom isn't free. Nobody gives up their life entirely, but people do give their time, which is all life is made of, after all. The least we can do is try to gift back, and it goes like this:

1. Thank you for (Samba, OpenOffice, DXX-Rebirth, Xournal, helping me with my networking issue, doing that talk on x, etc.).
2. Can I buy you a beer, or is there something I can do to help you back?
3. Here you go, and thanks again. I really dig what you did for me.

David L. Willson
Trainer, Engineer, Enthusiast
RHCE MCT MCSE Network+ A+ Linux+ LPIC-1 NovellCLA UbuntuCP
tel://720.333.LANS
Freedom is better when you earn it. Learn Linux.

----- "David Guntner" <davidg at akaMail.net> wrote:

> David L. Willson grabbed a keyboard and wrote:
> > BTW, the one giant CLUE list's signal-to-noise ratio is much higher,
> and
> > the contributors-to-leeches ratio, too!
> 
> I suppose that's a matter of opinion. :-)  If I had found the
> signal-to-noise ratio ok, I wouldn't have unsubscribed after being
> moved
> there.  Regrettably, at least for me, the noise-to-signal ratio was
> too
> high.
> 
> Interesting that your opinion of lurkers is that they're "leeches."
> People who want to learn, listen.  People who want to teach, talk.  I
> myself posted only very occasionally because I simply didn't have the
> answer to someone's question most of the time (the question in
> question
> would be outside my particular experience).  I've never seen any
> value
> in posting a message of "Yea, I'd like to know that too," or, "Yep,
> that's the answer I would have given" (if someone's already answered
> the
> question) to be of much value; all it does is add noise.  So yes,
> I've
> mostly lurked on this list.  But it was of value to me since it gave
> me
> new insights into things regarding my favorite OS. :-)  I can only
> assume that others who were lurking on the list had similar reasons.
> 
> I voted against the one giant list when it was proposed, but was
> willing
> to see what was going to happen when the vote went to one big list. 
> For
> me, at least, there was way too much stuff going on the new one big
> list
> that was not related to what kind of things had gone on clue-tech
> (which
> was the list I subscribed to in the first place).  I didn't make
> noise
> there; I didn't complain, I didn't whine.  I just watched a bit, came
> to
> the conclusion that the new list simply wasn't for me, and I left it. 
> I
> was surprised (and I'll admit, hopeful <grin>) when I saw a posting
> come
> across this list, so I figured I'd ask.
> 
> Nothing more than that. :-)
> 
>               --Dave
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> clue-tech mailing list
> clue-tech at cluedenver.org
> http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech