Re: RARA-AVIS: The definition of classic

From: jacquesdebierue (
Date: 04 Nov 2007

--- In, Patrick King <abrasax93@...> wrote:

> I have to agree with Miker here. This rigid concept of
> what is "on topic" and what is "off topic" is
> crippling to real communication, which any board is
> about. Like real-life conversations, these threads
> twist and turn. If you find one going on a tangent
> that doesn't interest you, stop reading it. I do all
> the time. But yelling "fowl" and "off topic" inspires
> post like this which really are off topic but need to
> be said.

Sorry, Patrick, but the purpose of this list is not up for discussion. It was clearly stated from the beginning and will remain what it is.

> If someone jumps into the middle of a thread trying to
> sell their book or their car or their refrigerator,
> that's off topic and they should be and will be shut
> down. But if a conversation veers in a direction which
> is less interesting to you, roll with it. There've got
> to be 15 threads here running all the time. Some other
> thread will have interest for you. Please don't
> inhibit our conversations. You can alway, yourself,
> bring them back to the course you're interested in
> with a pertinent comment. Censorship is a bore.

The only two rules in this list are that contributions must be on topic and that flames are not allowed. This has always worked well and it will continue to work well. Topics can be broad, of course, and often have many ramifications. That's fine. But if somebody is thinking of starting topics that don't have anything to do with hardboiled and noir literature, think twice, because it won't be allowed. There are other lists for discussing those topics, and there's always the barbershop.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 04 Nov 2007 EST