Proposed new rule


#1
  1. Enjoy!
I'd like to propose a new rule (1.5?):

Please flag all submissions and discussions of quizzes by starting the
subject with the string “[QUIZ]”.

I really enjoy following the discussions of the different quizzes

even though I rarely have time to do them anymore. But in a 100 to 200
message per day mailing list, it is easy to miss a submission or a
discussion when the subject line doesn’t indicate that it is
quiz-related. Apparently I am not the only person having this problem,
as illustrated by one of the RRobots submissions being missed last week.

This doesn't seem like it would be a particularly burdensome rule,

and it would make things a lot easier to follow.

If we want to get really bold, the rule could also ask people

submitting solutions to start the subject with “[QUIZ][SOLUTION]” :o)

Thoughts?

- Warren B.

#2

On Jan 3, 2006, at 4:23 PM, Warren B. wrote:

  1. Enjoy!
I'd like to propose a new rule (1.5?):

Please flag all submissions and discussions of quizzes by starting the
subject with the string “[QUIZ]”.

I’m fine with “recommending” this as long as everyone realizes that’s
all it will be.

If we want to get really bold, the rule could also ask people

submitting solutions to start the subject with “[QUIZ][SOLUTION]” :o)

Yuck. :slight_smile:

[SOLUTION] implies [QUIZ], I think, so we can drop the repatition.
Of course, now what you are suppose to put in the subject is getting
more complicated, which probably decreases the chance that it will
happen. That might be a reason to stick with just [QUIZ]. Opinions?

If the traffic is bothering people, we could also consider moving
Ruby Q. to it’s own mailing list. Do speak up, if we’re bugging
you…

James Edward G. II


#3

I like this proposal, and I like implementing it as a “recommendation.”

Regards,
Craig


#4

I agree. using [SOLUTION] by itself makes sense.

I like the idea of extending this concept further. Is it already a
“recommendation” that new software announcements (or updates) have
[ANN] in their subject line?

How about [QUESTION] for people looking for programming help, as well?
;o)

-Justin


#5

On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 23:04:45 -0000, James Edward G. II
removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

If the traffic is bothering people, we could also consider moving Ruby
Quiz to it’s own mailing list. Do speak up, if we’re bugging you…

I still read via the newsgroup, and I’d be sad to see the Quiz go
elsewhere. I’ve not been confident enough to have a go yet but I enjoy
trying them out, and learning from the solutions and discussion I see.


#6

On Jan 3, 2006, at 4:32 PM, Ross B. wrote:

discussion I see.


Ross B. - removed_email_address@domain.invalid

+1

Please don’t take the quiz to its own list James! I look forward to
reading the solutions and writeups very much and would consider ruby-
talk to be the perfect place for the quiz.

-Ezra


#7

James Edward G. II wrote:

If the traffic is bothering people, we could also consider moving Ruby
Quiz to it’s own mailing list. Do speak up, if we’re bugging you…

It’s already threaded quite nicely. I can recall one instance, in Quiz
60, where someone posted out of thread, and that was for a new solution.

I don’t mind the [QUIZ] as a “recommendation”, but let’s also recommend
readers be threaded. Regardless, [QUIZ] makes obvious good sense.

IMO, the quiz certainly does not need its own list.

–Steve


#8

On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 08:04:45AM +0900, James Edward G. II wrote:

[SOLUTION] implies [QUIZ], I think, so we can drop the repatition.
Of course, now what you are suppose to put in the subject is getting
more complicated, which probably decreases the chance that it will
happen. That might be a reason to stick with just [QUIZ]. Opinions?

I think prefacing subject lines with [QUIZ] makes good sense, and it can
be encouraged by having a header or footer in new quiz threads that
makes that convention known to readers. Confusing the issue by asking
people to use two different subject preface terms will probably just
lead to more people accidentally ignoring the convention, however, and I
think needlessly complicates the situation, so I’d advocate sticking
with [QUIZ] for all of it.

It has been suggested that other preface terms be used for other traffic
here. I don’t see this as being a particularly likely convention to
actually help anything, since it won’t be specifically prompted in
threads that are started by someone not in a position to necessarily
know about these conventions. For instance, someone new to the list
might not notice that he or she is supposed to start question thread
subjects with [QUESTION] (to say nothing of the fact that’s quite a bit
of extra typing), and a convention like that is worse than no such
convention when it’s only adhered to haphazardly, in my opinion.

If the traffic is bothering people, we could also consider moving
Ruby Q. to it’s own mailing list. Do speak up, if we’re bugging
you…

I’d prefer to keep it on ruby-talk, personally. I don’t really
participate, so I wouldn’t pick up the new list, but I like to see what
quizzes come up, and I like to think about the problem domain when I see
it. I guess what I’m saying is that it’s better for the lazy readers
like myself to have it on ruby-talk rather than making it separate.


Chad P. [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]

print substr(“Just another Perl hacker”, 0, -2);


#9

On Jan 3, 2006, at 7:26 PM, J. Ryan S. wrote:

Why does it have to be a rule at all? Seems like the only one who
posts the quiz is J.E.G. 2 and everyone just replies to that post.
Can’t it just be a suggestion to him alone?

This is how I’ve been operating, not wanting to get too heavy handed
with the rules. It works more often than it does, I think. There’s
still times when it doesn’t. I’m not sure if adding a rule will fix
that or not.

Seems that the quiz can stay here a bit longer. (At least that’s
what I’m hearing.) I’m grateful you all are so tolerant of our
playing around.

Let me here a few more opinions on the [QUIZ] rule, and I’ll add it
if that seems a popular request…

James Edward G. II


#10

Why does it have to be a rule at all? Seems like the only one who
posts the quiz is J.E.G. 2 and everyone just replies to that post.
Can’t it just be a suggestion to him alone?

~ ryan ~


#11

On Jan 3, 2006, at 7:48 PM, James Edward G. II wrote:

Let me here a few more opinions on the [QUIZ] rule, and I’ll add it
if that seems a popular request…

Personally don’t care. More importantly is that people reply to the
original thread. Keeping it under one (or two, …) thread(s) is
more than adequate.

So, I guess I’m a +0

–Steve


#12

Stephen W. schrieb:

So, I guess I’m a +0

–Steve

Hello,
Don’t make a new rule for that.

I mean the quiz master or James Edward G. II (may I abbr you in my
next messages?) start a thread here for people to reply on that. It has
to be common sense to use the given structures.
I personally filter all mails with [QUIZ] in a folder and view them
threaded, ordered by subject. This just works fine.
Besides [QUIZ], there is only [ANN] and [RAILS] I think.
I would like to have more tags, but that means all people have to use
them too and that won’t happen.

Just imagin a list where all ppl use a set of maybe 20 tags like
[REGEXP], [TOOLKIT], [HTTPD] and so on :>
That would be so nice, but never happening.

With kind regards from Germany.


#13

On 2006-01-04, Stephen W. removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

IMO, the quiz certainly does not need its own list.
Full ack to all points, Stephen.


#14

Robert R. removed_email_address@domain.invalid writes:

Just imagin a list where all ppl use a set of maybe 20 tags like
[REGEXP], [TOOLKIT], [HTTPD] and so on :>
That would be so nice, but never happening.

While we are at it, let me propose:
[ALIOTH-SHOOTOUT], [I-REALLY-WANT-TO-THE-RAILS-LIST], [SOAP],
[SYMBOL], [SYNTAX-TWEAKS], [TROLL], [WEB].

Thank you. :slight_smile:


#15

From: “Joel VanderWerf” removed_email_address@domain.invalid

Christian N. wrote:

While we are at it, let me propose:
[ALIOTH-SHOOTOUT], [I-REALLY-WANT-TO-THE-RAILS-LIST], [SOAP],
[SYMBOL], [SYNTAX-TWEAKS], [TROLL], [WEB].

Thank you. :slight_smile:

How about [META] for discussions about the list itself? :wink:

Would discussions about the [META] tag itself qualify as
[META][META] ?

SCNR,

Bill


#16

Christian N. wrote:

While we are at it, let me propose:
[ALIOTH-SHOOTOUT], [I-REALLY-WANT-TO-THE-RAILS-LIST], [SOAP],
[SYMBOL], [SYNTAX-TWEAKS], [TROLL], [WEB].

Thank you. :slight_smile:

How about [META] for discussions about the list itself? :wink:


#17

Christian N. wrote:

[SYMBOL], [SYNTAX-TWEAKS], [TROLL], [WEB].
There are many others, such as [PYTHON], [I-AM-CLUELESS],
[WHY-NO-AUTOINCREMENT], [WHINE], [FLAME], and of course
[LETS-TOTALLY-CHANGE-EVERYTHING-ABOUT-RUBY].

Hal


#18

Hal F. removed_email_address@domain.invalid writes:

There are many others, such as [PYTHON], [I-AM-CLUELESS],
[WHY-NO-AUTOINCREMENT], [WHINE], [FLAME], and of course
[LETS-TOTALLY-CHANGE-EVERYTHING-ABOUT-RUBY].

I composed my list by running

grep proposes ~/.xchat2/xchatlogs/* | grep chris2

It looks like these didn’t come up too often in latter times (or
didn’t really annoy me). :stuck_out_tongue:


#19

On 1/4/06, Hal F. removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

There are many others, such as [PYTHON], [I-AM-CLUELESS],
[WHY-NO-AUTOINCREMENT], [WHINE], [FLAME], and of course
[LETS-TOTALLY-CHANGE-EVERYTHING-ABOUT-RUBY].

I like that last one, but even better:

[AFTER-TWO-DAYS-OF-USING-RUBY-HERE-IS-HOW-I-WOULD-CHANGE-IT]

Though maybe lately we haven’t seen that too much.

Ryan


#20

On Jan 3, 2006, at 6:14 PM, Stephen W. wrote:

James Edward G. II wrote:

If the traffic is bothering people, we could also consider moving
Ruby Q. to it’s own mailing list. Do speak up, if we’re bugging
you…

It’s already threaded quite nicely. I can recall one instance, in
Quiz 60, where someone posted out of thread, and that was for a new
solution.

I just finished a hunt back through the last several quizzes and they
do seem to be threaded quite well. So good in fact, that I doubt a
new rule is going to change anything.

Warren are you using a threading MUA?

James Edward G. II