Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: news.duke.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!uunet!ash.uu.net!world!not-for-mail
From: buzzard@TheWorld.com (Sean T Barrett)
Subject: Re: Topic drift (was: [OT] Sorting algorithms IRL (was Re: IF for Non-Programmers))
Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself)
Message-ID: <Gs3sA5.390@world.std.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 19:18:05 GMT
References: <6MWc8.150082$TI5.7620229@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com> <3C797023.92707B2E@hotmail.com> <Gs3DF7.E3G@world.std.com> <a5dkrs$cm3$1@news.lth.se>
Nntp-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test72 (19 April 1999)
Lines: 53
Xref: news.duke.edu rec.arts.int-fiction:100684

In article <a5dkrs$cm3$1@news.lth.se>, Magnus Olsson <mol@df.lth.se> wrote:
>Sean, you're way out of line here. Nobody died and made you the
>moderator.

This is not true. All the participants in the forum
are responsible for policing it; there is nobody else
who will do so. Just because it isn't moderated doesn't
mean it's not supposed to have a charter and attempt to
stick to it. It can be done by email or it can be
done out loud. In this case I'm doing it out loud because
(a) I did it by email on this specific thread and was
ignored and (b) because it gives other posters to the
group, like you, the chance to see that I'm griping about
it and gives you the chance to voice your opinion that
it's a perfectly acceptable thread.

>And IMAO I think off-topic threads on sorting algorithms are the
>*least* of our troubles right now.

I wouldn't have mentioned it if it hadn't (a) seemed of
little interest to most readers and (b) had a reasonable
attempt made to move it to email which was ignored.

>I think it's the ability
>to chat about anything, the gentle topic drift that takes us to explore
>all kinds of strange subjects, that helps maintain the sense of community
>in groups like this.

As I've mentioned previously, it is this trend towards community
away from topicality that has turned much of Usenet from a useful tool
for communicating about specifics into yet another generic Internet chat
forum. There are newsgroups which have essentially entirely abandoned
their topic and are just chatty about nothing specific. (I mean this
literally; all the regulars just chat with each other and the 1%
of people posting on topic are ignored by the regulars, and should
they complain that the regulars are posting off-topic, are flamed
soundly for 'not understanding what the group is all about'.)

>Our enemy is the general grumpiness and the tendency to bring out the
>flamethrower at the slightest provocation. Trolls, drive-by flamers and
>resident flamers are also our enemies.
>
>Topic drift is not the enemy.

I consider both equal long-term dangers. If raif retreats to its
previous volume of posts, I won't be concerned about the off-topic
ones.

This really is the last I have to say on the subject. If others
feel the same they can take their turn policing the newsgroup; if
not, so be it.

SeanB
