[discuss] limitation of mails per day?

Seun Ojedeji seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
Sat Jan 4 09:59:45 UTC 2014

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton at ccianet.org>wrote:

> I respect your opinion but disagree. The volume here is far too large to
> keep up with even when your day job involves Internet policy.
I agree they can be too voluminous :) however i think its better to have
those logs in the archive (while we hit delete on our individual mail
boxes) than not to have those discussions at all. Perhaps we are
experiencing this much large threads because of emerging issues(Br being
one of them) which are occasional.

> The status quo means that many ideas are simply lost in the volume.
And wouldn't adding limit make some ideas remain unknown? While both
options have its pro and cons we just need to identify which is more
important; is it better to have the many ideas posted within a long thread
and hope that it will be useful for someone OR we end up having those ideas
not posted at all (due to limitation)


> Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>> sent from Google nexus 4
>> On 3 Jan 2014 22:44, "Nick Ashton-Hart" <nashton at ccianet.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Not that these aren't all interesting questions, but  speaking
>> personally I think we can implement something like this without turning it
>> into an exercise that requires an abacus or higher maths, to be completely
>> frank.
>> >
>> > This is implemented in other lists and the sky didn't fall in, did it?
>> >
>> Does the other list you refer have a similar role as 1Net? This is a
>> unique environment where there may be a need to respond 20times in a day to
>> multiple conversion by an individual while the same individual may not need
>> to write anything within a week.
>> There is the other thing in Dialogue which we may loose if limit is
>> implemented. I call it emotions; it is what people writes that provokes
>> others to respond and there is usually the probability(yeah maths) that
>> someone responding almost immediately when he/she finds an interesting
>> topic will provide more "effective" response than having to wait till to
>> use the next day access (due to limit restriction). By the second day,
>> there will have been many other mails which will then create a priority
>> response. IMHO I don't think 1Net should shut lips this way; it should give
>> opportunity to share and provoke ideas. We need those emotions to be
>> provoked to produce a better resolution, we need to provide the opportunity
>> to continue to disagree on a matter with hope to agree (or remain disagreed)
>> Cheers!
>> >
>> >
>> > Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >>  I am going to use one of my 4 to indicate that while I will endeavor
>> to comply, I think it is a bad idea.
>> >>
>> >> - already today, I notice shifting discussions off list.  Long threads
>> are what happens as one digs deeper into a topic using a conversational
>> email mode.  Yes, it can also happen when people are ping-ponging
>> accusatory cruft,  but that is not the only reason it happens.  Sometimes
>> the meat of a subject only comes out after a dialogue has gone on for bit
>> and gotten beyond the banalities.
>> >>
>> >> - how do you balance the contributions of those who write long
>> epistles, with those who contribute short comments.  Should we count words
>> too?  Do we need Thomas' email stats tool which seems a good behavioral
>> throttle? Or are we only trying to save people from having unread messages
>> as opposed to having them read too much?
>> >>
>> >> - if one is asked a question, do they just respond privately?
>> >>
>> >> - what about when there are more than 4 threads?  Should we combine
>> multiple threads in one message in order to keep our message count low?
>> >>
>> >> - what is a day?  Does the message I sent at 1am EST before going to
>> bed count with today's messages (I will assume it does - this is my
>> third).  Or do we do our calculations of 4/day using UTC?  Or maybe we use
>> Jewish rules and count from sundown?
>> >>
>> >> - to what extent will some people decide that if they get 4 messages a
>> day, well then they are going to use them.  Even if they have nothing to
>> say.
>> >>
>> >> Oh, well.
>> >>
>> >> avri
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 03-Jan-14 04:16, Adiel Akplogan wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hello all,
>> >>>
>> >>> In one of the thread there was a suggestion to limit the number of
>> mails per day per person to make it easy for everyone to follow and prevent
>> few and same people to overload the mailing list (the number of 4 was
>> suggested but that is disputable). I know some will jump that it is will be
>> breach to freedom of expression :-) (which in fact will be somehow true),
>> but frankly it is becoming not easy to keep track of everything posted on
>> the list. (I have to catchup with 300+ emails after few days off)
>> Can_we/should_we do anything at all about that? Thoughts?
>> >>>
>> >>> - a.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> discuss mailing list
>> >>> discuss at 1net.org
>> >>> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ________________________________
>> >>
>> >> discuss mailing list
>> >> discuss at 1net.org
>> >> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > discuss mailing list
>> > discuss at 1net.org
>> > http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.


*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140104/9e197fb2/attachment.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list