|Daemon News Ezine||BSD News||BSD Mall||BSD Support Forum||BSD Advocacy||BSD Updates|
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 02:31:05PM +0100, Paul Robinson wrote: > Quoting Kris Kennaway <kris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > Yes, because people are mistakenly asking support questions that are > > going unanswered. > > I could be a pedant and point out that happens in questions@ as well. :-) But for entirely different reasons. > > > What is the gain in it's removal? > > > > They'll hopefully keep looking at the list of mailing lists and figure > > out that questions@ is where they should send it. > > Perhaps we just need a better description of the list and make it clearer > where support queries go. We should not be deleting a list we know we > probably need, but instead be re-asserting its true purpose. Nice idea but it probably doesn't work. Unless you expect that a large volume of mail is going to arrive here (which I really doubt). > > That's what the list is ostensibly for, but the users are seeing > > "freebsd-config" and thinking something different. If there's still > > interest in the subject, the mailing list should at least be renamed > > to something more obviously not about technical support :) > > I can't think of a better name. I tell you what, I'll start answering > support queries with a boilerplate "go to -questions@" response, let's give > it a couple of months and see where it goes. That's what has happened in the last year or so -- check the archives. I'm with Kris, removing this list will do more good for newbies. freebsd-config-mgmt@ or something like that sounds far less likely to attract generic support questions. --Stijn -- "Well," Brahma said, "even after ten thousand explanations, a fool is no wiser, but an intelligent man requires only two thousand five hundred." -- The Mahabharata.
Description: PGP signature