From: ptkwt@...1.aracnet.com (Phil Tomson)
Date: 2002-01-24T04:14:49+09:00
Subject: Re: [POLL]: ruby-talk seperation

In article <a2m1jj$1cs@ftp.ee.vill.edu>,
Tobias DiPasquale <anany@ece.villanova.edu> wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I am proposing a poll in which people will reply to this posting and list
>the top five lists that they would like to see if a seperation of
>ruby-talk should (would) occur. This will help get a better feel for
>where people's interests lie, and also help to split the traffic up
>better between the newly created lists. Please reply with your top five
>lists, and any comments that you desire, as well.
>
>You can reply to this post on the mailing list, or to me personally, and
>I will compile the results and report back to the mailing list in one
>week's time. At such time, I will contact the maintainer of the ruby-talk
>ML and see what can be done about implementing the new lists.
>
>Those people that already suggested new lists need not reply again, but
>can if they want to. Participation is, of course, optional.
>

I'm not going to suggest any new lists - there are good partitions already 
mentioned.  I do want to suggest that all the new lists be mirrored to 
comp.lang.ruby so that readers of the newsgroup get the 'big picture'.  
If we don't do that I'm afraid there will be too much fragmentation in the 
community - sure, we're growing in numbers, but the Ruby community is 
still relatively small so it wouldn't be advisable to split it too much 
just yet.  

Again, multiple mailing lists is a good idea for those subscribing to the 
ml, but please ensure that all the discussions taking place on those ml's 
are also taking place on comp.lang.ruby.  When the community gets bigger 
it might be a good idea to create more subgroups of comp.lang.ruby, but I 
don't think we're at the point yet.

Phil