[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Time to split the Lua list?
- From: Lorenzo Donati <lorenzodonatibz@...>
- Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2018 05:21:12 +0100
On 04/12/2018 09:34, Dirk Laurie wrote:
IMO, the problem is not that many (most?, all?) of us had been part of
any of those group /sometimes/ and/or /briefly/.
Op Di. 4 Des. 2018 om 09:55 het Sean Conner <email@example.com> geskryf:
It was thus said that the Great Gé Weijers once stated:
There are actually three clusters:
1. Those who use Lua as it is.
2. Those who dream about Lua as it might be.
3. Those who argue for argument's sake.
No split of clusters #1 and #2 is going to deter cluster #3.
Perhaps we should give everyone a word and/or message allowance (5 messages
and 500 words/day?)
This would force commenters to weigh their words carefully, or their
message will bounce...
Best course of action is to ignore group 3 outright. Group 2 isn't *that*
bad, but encourage them to at least try to implement their ideas.
Anyway, the groups are not all that distinct. I have posted in all
three categories, and I dare you to argue that you have not.
I dare say that even some posts falling into group #3 may sometimes be
useful food for thought. Even if they generate long-winded threads.
The problem are the ones who consistently, insistently and almost
exclusively fall into group #3 for (almost) every message they post!
These are the kind of persons that (e.g.), when asked whether they want
sugar in their coffee, start a rant about how bad is eating sugar, go on
for half an hour, then get the sugar and talk for /another half an hour/
on how bad coffee tastes without sugar (and maybe criticize you because
you asked for tea instead)! O_O
This makes the list S/N (signal to noise) ratio much worse.