[at-l] Survival of the fittest (a Better List)

[rickboudrie at hotmail.com (rick boudrie)]

>I have always enjoyed the first couple of vollies in any of the legitimate 
>topics, but, it is the long >winded back and forth between the vocal few 
>that really wear you down.

In my opinion, the list would be much more readable if NO ONE were to post 
more than 2 or 3 times a week (or 5?) in any thread that smacked of 
contoversy or debate.

In doing so, people could still say anything they liked-- if one felt 
compelled to call someone an ass, grasshopper or a litter flower we could 
still do so. If someone wanted to share the wisdom of the ages, no problem.  
The only thing is, the more prolific of posters in debate threads would have 
to collect thier thoughts into a few well thought out posts, which more 
people might actually read, rather than spreading them out into a never 
ending flow which will unevitably lead to someone cracking.

How would one impose such a limit?  There would have to be a near unanamous 
understanding from everone for it to have a chance. But by looking at the 
number of posts (rather than thier content) we would have an objective 
standard.  No one would have to pass judgement on another's character.  But 
rather just the number of his posts.

Think of how different the discussions of MaKaye would have gone if noone 
posted more than 3 times a week in that thread?  Everything that could have 
been said would still have been said, and feathers would not have beeen 
nearly so ruffled.  Same thing about WF or global warming.  You name it.

Think of the windmill thread coming up.  I find the specific information to 
be exactly what I want to read on AT-L.  It is facinating to hear people's 
perspectives.  But what what could happen?  Frankly, all the good 
information (which I eat up), has the potential of getting lost under the 
weight of posts.  I am not saying I don't want to hear it all.  I do.  
Rather I am saying that I will digest it far better if I can read it in 
bigger chunks.  The added advantage is that if each of us were to limit his 
posts on the subject, more people might actively participate.

Imposing (by way of a collective understanding) a set limit of posts per 
person per week on all contentious threads, would be like tending a garden.  
It would give sunlight to let other threads grow. And it wouldn't ask anyone 
to change thier personality.  We could be mean, witty, stupid, precient, 
brilliant, whatever.  We could all be ourselves.

Rick B

_________________________________________________________________
>From the hottest toys to tips on keeping fit this winter, you’ll find a 
range of helpful holiday info here.  
http://special.msn.com/network/happyholidays.armx