[at-l] Keeping it a hiking discussion?

[redhead at hack.net (redhead@xxxxxxxx)]

Okay, guys - I'm going to weigh in for a minute or five on the "topic 
controversy" and point something out.  Since I came home from work (where I had 
read all my email) there have been the followings topics posted: excellent 
stuff on backpacking food, pack weight, the cost of a thru, filters and 
alternatives, tents, enthusiastic receipt of new gear, reports of how gear 
measured up in real life tests, a discussion of a bear attack, hiker appetites 
as they apply to food, a mini trip report, and fuel choices. Many were in the 
form of a question, all of which were answered. Some of these were answered by 
people who have thru hiked and have been there /done that. Some were answered 
by people who, while not having thru hiked, have hiked for a long time and have 
also been there/done that.

Amidst those very on topic posts were these off topic posts.  A brief thread 
about Felix's name, a HUGELY helpful post on Adobe Acrobat, and a lesson on 
what cognac really is. I guess the thread on "topics" falls into the on topic 
catagory, but really, it's more list related than hiking related, I think, so 
it falls into a grey area.

My question is - which is a bigger waste of bandwidth? 50 posts in one day 
about the topics of posts, or considerably fewer posts that are off topic? I'm 
not going to go into my typical soap box lecture about how this is a virtual 
campfire. Enough people have done that to get the point across, I think.

I think the point is - the off topic posts give this list character. There are 
a whole lot of lists you can belong to that are STRICTLY about hiking.  And I 
know of several people on this list who subscribe to others also.  What this 
list has had in the past that has kept so many of us here year after year is 
unique.  We get to learn about each other as people, and that adds a lot to the 
discussions, when you feel like you know someone - even if you're wrong ;)  
Ryan long ago asked everyone to CLEARLY label the subject line "OT: whatever 
the subject", so that folks who weren't interested in the "campfire chit chat" 
could send them to a filter, or skip over them if they are getting digest form. 
He even added the instant archives, so you could have an additional choice of 
not getting all the email by going no mail and read only what you want, while 
still being able to post. I think the fact that he has done these things would 
indicate that he likes the list the way it is. Unique. The only time he has 
ever started saying "stay on topic" is when the off topic or even ON topic 
subjects caused a shouting match. To his credit he continues to let us carry on 
without an iron fist of control. Much more of this bickering and hey, maybe 
he'll start actually moderating and enforcing strictly on topic posts - and 
then this list will be just like every other list out there.  I doubt he would 
see the point in spending his money and time on it if that were to happen.

If you want a moderated,  strictly on topic hiking list, there are lots to 
choose from. I only ask that you bear in mind that serious hiking posts DO get 
answered here, by a lot of experienced people. I think the arguing about on and 
off topic posts is more likely to drive a new member away than joking about 
Kelly's green counters.  Because it's the atmosphere that counts a lot - and 
arguing never adds anything to that. While joking around occassionally does.

Perhaps we can try going back to being really good about including OT in the 
subject line, and then everyone can get what they want out of this list.

A bit more than 2 cents, but there ya go.

Red
(who didn't label this OT because it'd be nice if everyone would actually 
consider using OT in their subject line when appropriate)