Gary Lee Nelson

I have been thinking about this gentle rant for a while...

Some threads are becoming difficult to follow.

Be sure that your response is actually part of the thread and not some new

If a message contains a huge patch, edit it out of your reply to save

BUT, copy enough of the original message so that we can tell who you are

responding to and particularly who you are thanking. A general thanks

doesn't let us know whose work you found helpful.

Like many on this list, I often spend a good bit of time to provide feedback

and small tutorial patches if the problem really interests me and making the

Be sure that your response is actually part of the thread and not some new
thread - edit subject line.

If a message contains a huge patch, edit it out of your reply to save
bandwidth.

BUT, copy enough of the original message so that we can tell who you are
responding to and particularly who you are thanking. A general thanks
doesn't let us know whose work you found helpful.

Like many on this list, I often spend a good bit of time to provide feedback
and small tutorial patches if the problem really interests me and making the
patch teaches me something.

Cheers
Gary Lee Nelson
Oberlin College
www.timara.oberlin.edu/GaryLeeNelson

maintaining-threads-on-the-list

yes, maintaining thread continuity is a dieing art form...

On Feb 18, 2008 11:31 PM, Gary Lee Nelson wrote:

> I have been thinking about this gentle rant for a while...

> Some threads are becoming difficult to follow.

> Be sure that your response is actually part of the thread and not some new

> If a message contains a huge patch, edit it out of your reply to save

> BUT, copy enough of the original message so that we can tell who you are

> responding to and particularly who you are thanking. A general thanks

> doesn't let us know whose work you found helpful.

> Like many on this list, I often spend a good bit of time to provide

> and small tutorial patches if the problem really interests me and making

On Feb 18, 2008 11:31 PM, Gary Lee Nelson  wrote:

> I have been thinking about this gentle rant for a while...
>
> @rantmode on
>
> Some threads are becoming difficult to follow.
>
> Please...
>
> Be sure that your response is actually part of the thread and not some new
> thread - edit subject line.
>
> If a message contains a huge patch, edit it out of your reply to save
> bandwidth.
>
> BUT, copy enough of the original message so that we can tell who you are
> responding to and particularly who you are thanking. A general thanks
> doesn't let us know whose work you found helpful.
>
> Like many on this list, I often spend a good bit of time to provide
> feedback
> and small tutorial patches if the problem really interests me and making
> the
> patch teaches me something.
>
> @rantmode off
>
> Cheers
> Gary Lee Nelson
> Oberlin College
> www.timara.oberlin.edu/GaryLeeNelson
>
>
>

it would help if the forum was smart enough to detect a new thread, when someone replies to a thread and changes the subject line. seems like a simple regexp would do the trick, but who knows.

it would help if the forum was smart enough to detect a new thread, when someone replies to a thread and changes the subject line.  seems like a simple regexp would do the trick, but who knows.


> it would help if the forum was smart enough to detect a new thread, when someone replies to a thread and changes the subject line. 

> seems like a simple regexp would do the trick, but who knows.

It actually does do that. However, it's a problem when someone uses the 

reply button and sets an In-Reply-To: header and then changes the 

subject to something else. Keep in mind that this is not just a forum, 

it's tied into a mailing list as well which adds it's own set of 

challenges. Also, I think what Gary might be referring to is topic drift 

Another issue is people quoting the entire message in their reply. This 

is just laziness and might be fine for one-on-one email but is basically 

a big burst of noise in the mailing list/forum context. I don't know 

whether to laugh or cry at the response earlier in this thread where 

Gary's entire message was quoted simply for the purpose of a "me too". 

These sort of responses contribute nothing to the discussion. It's fine 

if you agree, but unless you have something else to add, it's better to 

Many of the issues that Gary describes in his post are easily avoided by 

people just simply using a small bit of forethought before they post. It 

seems to me that this is the biggest issue. People are getting chattier 

and chattier, asking questions then posting neverminds 15 minutes later. 

Eventually we're going to start deleting these noise posts. This forum 

is a great resource, but it could be so much greater if people would 

just make their posts count for something with greater frequency. Think 

before you post, and it it doesn't add to the discussion, then think 

It also behooves the beginners and newcomers to realize that, the more 

care you put into putting together a thoughtful message that describes 

your situation in great detail, the more likely you are to get a 

detailed, thoughtful response. "X isn't working and I don't know why" 

tells us nothing, except that you didn't even care enough about your own 

issue to describe it in greater detail. If you yourself don't care, why 

Please keep in mind that with every post, you are either strengthening 

or weakening this resource. Act accordingly.

Robert Ramirez wrote:
> it would help if the forum was smart enough to detect a new thread, when someone replies to a thread and changes the subject line.  
> seems like a simple regexp would do the trick, but who knows.

It actually does do that. However, it's a problem when someone uses the 
reply button and sets an In-Reply-To: header and then changes the 
subject to something else. Keep in mind that this is not just a forum, 
it's tied into a mailing list as well which adds it's own set of 
challenges. Also, I think what Gary might be referring to is topic drift 
within a thread.

Another issue is people quoting the entire message in their reply. This 
is just laziness and might be fine for one-on-one email but is basically 
a big burst of noise in the mailing list/forum context. I don't know 
whether to laugh or cry at the response earlier in this thread where 
Gary's entire message was quoted simply for the purpose of a "me too". 
These sort of responses contribute nothing to the discussion. It's fine 
if you agree, but unless you have something else to add, it's better to 
not post at all.

Many of the issues that Gary describes in his post are easily avoided by 
people just simply using a small bit of forethought before they post. It 
seems to me that this is the biggest issue. People are getting chattier 
and chattier, asking questions then posting neverminds 15 minutes later. 
  Eventually we're going to start deleting these noise posts. This forum 
is a great resource, but it could be so much greater if people would 
just make their posts count for something with greater frequency. Think 
before you post, and it it doesn't add to the discussion, then think 
again before posting.

It also behooves the beginners and newcomers to realize that, the more 
care you put into putting together a thoughtful message that describes 
your situation in great detail, the more likely you are to get a 
detailed, thoughtful response. "X isn't working and I don't know why" 
tells us nothing, except that you didn't even care enough about your own 
issue to describe it in greater detail. If you yourself don't care, why 
should you expect anyone else to?

Please keep in mind that with every post, you are either strengthening 
or weakening this resource. Act accordingly.

> and chattier, asking questions then posting neverminds 15 minutes later.

> Eventually we're going to start deleting these noise posts. This forum

> is a great resource, but it could be so much greater if people would

> just make their posts count for something with greater frequency. Think

> before you post, and it it doesn't add to the discussion, then think

Indeed. I am guilty of this on occasion. I've now put myself in the

habit of composing an email and saving it to a drafts folder and only

after I try a few more things to be absolutely sure about what I'm

posting about do I send the draft off with further additions. Often

though I just end up deleting the draft as the exercise of writing my

question down was enough of a trigger to get me back on the right

> People are getting chattier
> and chattier, asking questions then posting neverminds 15 minutes later.
>   Eventually we're going to start deleting these noise posts. This forum
> is a great resource, but it could be so much greater if people would
> just make their posts count for something with greater frequency. Think
> before you post, and it it doesn't add to the discussion, then think
> again before posting.

Indeed.  I am guilty of this on occasion.  I've now put myself in the
habit of composing an email and saving it to a drafts folder and only
after I try a few more things to be absolutely sure about what I'm
posting about do I send the draft off with further additions.  Often
though I just end up deleting the draft as the exercise of writing my
question down was enough of a trigger to get me back on the right
track.

I'm wondering what the ratio of forum users to mailing list users is. Can't really imagine a lot of people would still use the mailing list, but maybe there still are? Otherwise, isn't it an idea to get rid of it sometime?

I'd like for people to always edit out patches when they reply. Replied patches can't be copied anyway, and it makes it easier to see which patches you've tried and which you haven't.

I still use the mailing lists exclusively; I did try to use the forums, 

but find them such a faff that I'd just end up not using it at all, 

It's not helped by not being able to change the address one uses on the 

forums (unlike mailing lists), but I also find the whole way of working 

> I'm wondering what the ratio of forum users to mailing list users is.

> Can't really imagine a lot of people would still use the mailing

> list, but maybe there still are? Otherwise, isn't it an idea to get

I still use the mailing lists exclusively; I did try to use the forums, 
but find them such a faff that I'd just end up not using it at all, 
except for searching the archives.

It's not helped by not being able to change the address one uses on the 
forums (unlike mailing lists), but I also find the whole way of working 
in a mail client much more fluid.

Bas van der Graaff wrote:
> I'm wondering what the ratio of forum users to mailing list users is.
> Can't really imagine a lot of people would still use the mailing
> list, but maybe there still are? Otherwise, isn't it an idea to get
> rid of it sometime?


If you remember when the forum started, most people

were more pro-list than pro-forum. Maybe the balance

has shifted a little now, but I for one would be very

The list is easier to search, easier to customise and

organize, and it carries attachments correctly - in

fact, I only ever visit the forum if I have problems

> I'm wondering what the ratio of forum users to

> mailing list users is. Can't really imagine a lot of

> people would still use the mailing list, but maybe

> there still are? Otherwise, isn't it an idea to get

> I'd like for people to always edit out patches when

> they reply. Replied patches can't be copied anyway,

> and it makes it easier to see which patches you've

I'm with you all the way with that one, though

PS. Um, should i have changed this to a new topic,

Noooooo!
If you remember when the forum started, most people
were more pro-list than pro-forum. Maybe the balance
has shifted a little now, but I for one  would be very
sad to see the list go. 
The list is easier to search, easier to customise and
organize, and it carries attachments correctly - in
fact, I only ever visit the forum if I have problems
with my mail account.

> I'm wondering what the ratio of forum users to
> mailing list users is. Can't really imagine a lot of
> people would still use the mailing list, but maybe
> there still are? Otherwise, isn't it an idea to get
> rid of it sometime?
>
> I'd like for people to always edit out patches when
> they reply. Replied patches can't be copied anyway,
> and it makes it easier to see which patches you've
> tried and which you haven't. 
> --

 I'm with you all the way with that one, though
cheers
Roger

PS. Um, should i have changed this to a new topic,
'list vs. forum revisited'...?


On 2/19/08 2:52 AM, "Wallace Winfrey" wrote:

> Many of the issues that Gary describes in his post are easily avoided by

> people just simply using a small bit of forethought before they post. It

> seems to me that this is the biggest issue. People are getting chattier

> It also behooves the beginners and newcomers to realize that, the more

> care you put into putting together a thoughtful message that describes

> your situation in great detail, the more likely you are to get a

> detailed, thoughtful response. "X isn't working and I don't know why"

> tells us nothing, except that you didn't even care enough about your own

> issue to describe it in greater detail. If you yourself don't care, why

> Please keep in mind that with every post, you are either strengthening

> or weakening this resource. Act accordingly.

I was simply voicing a minor annoyance. The strength of this list is its

openness. I would not want to see "noise" messages just deleted. I would

not want to decide what is noise and what isn't.

On 2/19/08 2:52 AM, "Wallace Winfrey"  wrote:

> Many of the issues that Gary describes in his post are easily avoided by
> people just simply using a small bit of forethought before they post. It
> seems to me that this is the biggest issue. People are getting chattier
> and chattier, asking questions then posting neverminds 15 minutes later.
>   Eventually we're going to start deleting these noise posts. This forum
> is a great resource, but it could be so much greater if people would
> just make their posts count for something with greater frequency. Think
> before you post, and it it doesn't add to the discussion, then think
> again before posting.
>
> It also behooves the beginners and newcomers to realize that, the more
> care you put into putting together a thoughtful message that describes
> your situation in great detail, the more likely you are to get a
> detailed, thoughtful response. "X isn't working and I don't know why"
> tells us nothing, except that you didn't even care enough about your own
> issue to describe it in greater detail. If you yourself don't care, why
> should you expect anyone else to?
>
> Please keep in mind that with every post, you are either strengthening
> or weakening this resource. Act accordingly.
>
> cheers
>
> w

I was simply voicing a minor annoyance.  The strength of this list is its
openness.  I would not want to see "noise" messages just deleted.  I would
not want to decide what is noise and what isn't.

> I would not want to see "noise" messages just deleted. I would

> not want to decide what is noise and what isn't.

Well, the good news is that we've actually done quite a bit of noise 

trimming over the years, and nobody seems to have gotten too bothered. 

If you're looking for an example of a good candidate, it's those threads 

where a person asks "how do i do something" and then posts a "nevermind" 

15 minutes later. if that thread doesn't receive any other posts, and 

fades into the archives of the site, you can be pretty sure that thread 

is going to be deleted from the archives. Another candidate for noise 

deletion are the excessive quote replies that serve no useful purpose.

> I would not want to see "noise" messages just deleted.  I would
> not want to decide what is noise and what isn't.

Well, the good news is that we've actually done quite a bit of noise 
trimming over the years, and nobody seems to have gotten too bothered. 
If you're looking for an example of a good candidate, it's those threads 
where a person asks "how do i do something" and then posts a "nevermind" 
15 minutes later. if that thread doesn't receive any other posts, and 
fades into the archives of the site, you can be pretty sure that thread 
is going to be deleted from the archives. Another candidate for noise 
deletion are the excessive quote replies that serve no useful purpose.

This sounds fine for the Forum archive but sometimes the first part of these

"nevermind" threads on the list jogs my memory about something - often

This list seems to be largely self-regulating. I, for one, ignore questions

that can be answered by reading the available documentation. I also ignore

posts with "URGENT" in the subject or "I need this by Friday" in the body.

Rather than complaining. I prepared a listing of what I think are the

fundamental resources and posted it as an attachment via the Forum. I

https://cycling74.com/forums/index.php?t=msg&goto=122344&rid=0&srch=basic

The attachment to this post points to lots of other people's work.

My original rant was prompted by a "thank you" for something I worked on

with several other list members. That message contained nothing to indicate

which post was being answered. I don't look at this as competition but it

would have been useful to know whether my input was on-point and/or helpful.

On 2/19/08 9:21 AM, "Wallace Winfrey" wrote:

>> I would not want to see "noise" messages just deleted. I would

>> not want to decide what is noise and what isn't.

> Well, the good news is that we've actually done quite a bit of noise

> trimming over the years, and nobody seems to have gotten too bothered.

> If you're looking for an example of a good candidate, it's those threads

> where a person asks "how do i do something" and then posts a "nevermind"

> 15 minutes later. if that thread doesn't receive any other posts, and

> fades into the archives of the site, you can be pretty sure that thread

> is going to be deleted from the archives. Another candidate for noise

> deletion are the excessive quote replies that serve no useful purpose.

This sounds fine for the Forum archive but sometimes the first part of these
"nevermind" threads on the list jogs my memory about something - often
basic.

This list seems to be largely self-regulating.  I, for one, ignore questions
that can be answered by reading the available documentation.  I also ignore
posts with "URGENT" in the subject or "I need this by Friday" in the body.
Rather than complaining. I prepared a listing of what I think are the
fundamental resources and posted it as an attachment via the Forum.  I
searched the Forum to find it at

https://cycling74.com/forums/index.php?t=msg&goto=122344&rid=0&srch=basic
+learning+resources#msg_122344

My original rant was prompted by a "thank you" for something I worked on
with several other list members.  That message contained nothing to indicate
which post was being answered. I don't look at this as competition but it
would have been useful to know whether my input was on-point and/or helpful.

On 2/19/08 9:21 AM, "Wallace Winfrey"  wrote:

> Gary Lee Nelson wrote:
>
>> I would not want to see "noise" messages just deleted.  I would
>> not want to decide what is noise and what isn't.
>
> Well, the good news is that we've actually done quite a bit of noise
> trimming over the years, and nobody seems to have gotten too bothered.
> If you're looking for an example of a good candidate, it's those threads
> where a person asks "how do i do something" and then posts a "nevermind"
> 15 minutes later. if that thread doesn't receive any other posts, and
> fades into the archives of the site, you can be pretty sure that thread
> is going to be deleted from the archives. Another candidate for noise
> deletion are the excessive quote replies that serve no useful purpose.
>
> w

> This list seems to be largely self-regulating.

I concur and I hope that it stays that way. The one thing I absolutely 

hate doing is any kind of content moderation, but sometimes it is 

inevitable, particularly if people are being personally abusive (which 

only seems to happen once in a blue moon, thank goodness).

One of the primary reasons we do after-the-fact post editing in the 

forum archives is because excessive quoted replies and threads with no 

content slant the search results. A thread in which every post has the 

original post quoted in it's reply will get more weight for those 

particular search terms than they deserve. I know the search engine has 

it's share of issues (all of which will eventually be addressed, I 

promise), but ultimately it begins with the content.

> My original rant was prompted by a "thank you" for something I worked on

This is one of the drawbacks of an integrated forum/mailing list 

solution (and there are many). Replying in the forum often tends towards 

terseness because the entire thread is laid out above your post. A good 

mailing list post quotes a relevant bit from the message it is replying 

That said, it doesn't have to be that way. For all the advantages that a 

forum has, one disadvantage is that it seems to enable posting laziness 

in a way that mailing lists do not. The only remedy is for people to 

develop better posting habits (and I thank you for the good example you 

> This list seems to be largely self-regulating.  

I concur and I hope that it stays that way. The one thing I absolutely 
hate doing is any kind of content moderation, but sometimes it is 
inevitable, particularly if people are being personally abusive (which 
only seems to happen once in a blue moon, thank goodness).

 > This sounds fine for the Forum archive

One of the primary reasons we do after-the-fact post editing in the 
forum archives is because excessive quoted replies and threads with no 
content slant the search results. A thread in which every post has the 
original post quoted in it's reply will get more weight for those 
particular search terms than they deserve. I know the search engine has 
it's share of issues (all of which will eventually be addressed, I 
promise), but ultimately it begins with the content.

> My original rant was prompted by a "thank you" for something I worked on
> with several other list members.  

This is one of the drawbacks of an integrated forum/mailing list 
solution (and there are many). Replying in the forum often tends towards 
terseness because the entire thread is laid out above your post. A good 
mailing list post quotes a relevant bit from the message it is replying 
to and puts the reply below.

That said, it doesn't have to be that way. For all the advantages that a 
forum has, one disadvantage is that it seems to enable posting laziness 
in a way that mailing lists do not. The only remedy is for people to 
develop better posting habits (and I thank you for the good example you 
consistently set in this area, Gary).

i use gmail filters to navigate the lists, it does a good job of keeping

Maintaining threads on the list