OldTools Archive

Recent Bios FAQ

-51 berry@a... (Don Berry) 1970‑01‑01 RE: It's here!

O'Deen wrote:
> 
> Let me try this:
> 
> The purpose of this list is to have a semi-permanent side-bar, 
> where people are a little more comfortable at being a lot
> more informal, and a good deal more arcane. This is not, I 
> repeat NOT a place for the Neanderthals to run off and hide.
> Tom and I, et al haven't waivered on that point. However, 
> there was a significant response from some people who just 
> want to talk old tools and hand work, and *that* audience, 
> I believe, is rather limited. I picture the typical opening
> article of the day to be: So, galoots, what shall we talk 
> about today?
> 
> Trust me. 
Now THAT'S a bad start, O'Deen :)

For the record, I'm a very eclectic woodworker and a dedicated opponent of
fanaticism of any stripe.  I've posted longish newbyish reports on my
random forays into things from tool collecting to hammer veneering with
hide glue to setting up a dust collector.  In general, I've gotten
friendly notes saying "thanks, I was just wondering about that" from at
least one person for each post.  I've never been subjected to email abuse
at any time. 

I _have_ bought tools from Patrick Leach, and have trememdous respect for
his knowledge, wit, and writing style, but I have refrained from ever
refering to him as "Leach-meister", "Patster", "king of the neanderthals",
"most high grand poobah of hand tools", or any other appellation which
might make the Normites (or me or PL, for that matter) puke.  ;)
 
> 
> I like the homey atmosphere of a close circle of friends, where I 
> can be a little more frank, and a little less neurotic. Think about
> it. Some folks estimate that around 50K people read rec.norm. Publicity
> is fun, but sometimes it's appropriate so go out to the woodshed.

Yeah, the volume and readership is the biggest problem with the
"electronic front porch" analogy.  I'm all for diversity, but think it
though to a logical conclusion:  a small, small fraction of the population
is currently internet-savvy.  This fraction has been increasing
dramatically and will continue to do so for the forseeable future.  Big
deal, you say, only 1 2.122e-314ive a rat's ass about woodworking. O.K.; 1163336
64542f 1
million = 10k;  I currently can associate maybe 50 names with a enough
postings to form a fuzzy opinion of their tastes, style, personality, etc.
- of course, some folks can make a BIG impression with one post :) - so,
what am I supposed to do with 10k people on my front porch?  Call the cops
and turn loose the dogs, most likely.  My numbers may be off either
way by an order of magnitude, but the point is valid: Too many
undifferentiated signals = noise. (EE-types objecting to the analogy
can....)

My style of reading rec.ww has changed dramatically over the last 6 months.
Sure, I can kill subjects and filter in other ways, but I'm still spending
too much time sorting the wheat from the chaff (no value judgement here - 
just a matter of personal tastes).  I place no blame whatsoever on the
unsuspecting person who has a once-a-year wood related question and
stumbles on to rec.ww.  Nor do I blame folks who discover the group
and immediately repeat questions just answered in great detail.  Still,
I suspect that the sheer number of folks climbing onto the Internet will
soon lead to literally 100's of such sincere nuisance posts per day.  

I suppose it will be self-limiting: if the value of rec.ww decreases,
fewer folks will follow it, decreasing the number of posts.  It will
eventually reach a steady-state, but I fear that this equilibrium position
will not be of much interest to me. 

*elitism alert* 
PLUS, each 10,000 new readers will produce ca. 100 serious
contributers, which in turn will yield 1 new Patrick Leach and 10 new
xxx's  (fill in your least favorite participant.)  IS IT WORTH IT? :)

I have been opposed to subdividing rec.ww for a long time.  I suppose
I still am, but I'm just not very optimistic about the future value
(for me) of the newsgroup if things continue along the current path.

> 
> The other thing is, it allows some people, who prefer e-mail
> to hang-out and talk about a particular subject.
> 

Yup, I like this idea.  I've had nice extended email threads on topics
which were arcane, or which we decided were of less interest to the
general readership, but which I would have liked to shared with >1 other
person.  The only question now is if some of us can limit ourselves to talk
about ONLY neander-stuff here.  I mean, how long do y'all think O'Deen
can go without mentioning his BS?

> So, the question is: How to notify rec.norm, or should we?
> 

Nah.  At least not officially.  And DON'T turn this into a newsgroup,
either.  

Don Berry

Just say at least I'm not as verbose as Lamantia :)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Private replies: berry@a...


Recent Bios FAQ