Meta-suggestion about conduct of discussions (was: Re: The new linux-il - a few tips to get you (re)started)

[Omer Zak]

May I suggest that someone open a Web page, which will summarize the
main points (both pro and con) of the discussion so far?
Once such a Web page exists and is available for modifications (such as
being a Wiki), we can start enforcing the netiquette of expecting people
to say something only if they add something new to the discussion?

This reminds me of the way my DEAF-INFO Web site got started more than
10 years ago.  In a deafness related mailing list, to which I was
subscribed, the same arguments were hashed again and again in endless
arguments.  Until one day I got tired from this and summarized the main
points in a FAQ (sort of), and out of the FAQ, the Web site grew up.

If such a page already exists and I am not aware of it, simply let me
(and the entire list) know about it and I'll be glad to add a mention of
it to my .sig in future postings to Linux-IL about this subject.

On Sat, 2009-01-31 at 08:33 +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Please, if we are going to be re-hashing discussions, let's try to keep 
> them two-way by LISTENING and ADDRESSING the counter points. Otherwise, 
> we are back at people re-stating their positions again and again in the 
> hope that someone will magically budge. If that's what we are doing 
> here, I'm out of the discussion and you all can just do whatever you like.

-- 
You haven't made an impact on the world before you caused a Debian
release to be named after Snufkin.
My own blog is at http://www.zak.co.il/tddpirate/

My opinions, as expressed in this E-mail message, are mine alone.
They do not represent the official policy of any organization with which
I may be affiliated in any way.
WARNING TO SPAMMERS:  at http://www.zak.co.il/spamwarning.html