Post by thread:[OT] Proposal: Add another tag

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] Proposal: Add another tag'
2008\04\14@111959 by M. Adam Davis

Too much discussion regarding the list (meta discussion), and it's all opinion at this point. I'd appreciate it if the admins would consider making a statement regarding whether a new tag is going to be added so the discussion can be closed. To throw some statistics into the mess: Nearly 40% of the threads on the piclist since November 2004 have been in the EE thread. OT is about 27% of the threads. PIC is about 34% of the threads. We've added tags for topics that are rarely used. There has been no penalty to the list for adding them, and even though they are rarely used now it's not hurting anything that they are still around (AVR, SX, ARM). So I propose that we simply add another topic. I prefer that EE remain Electrical Engineering - We needn't define it to the Nth degree, nor will it need to be policed excessively. The new topic would merely be anything that people didn't feel was off topic, nor electrical engineering. It would be an "off topic but of general engineering interest" Why we need another topic - - The admins have sided with Russell that anything of interest to some engineers should not be considered off topic (though they don't define the "Topic" of the list, and therefore off topic really has no definition other than "If there's no tag for it, throw it in there") - The EE tag is getting most of the list traffic. This list is almost defined by the EE tag now. We can more finely divide the EE tag to the benefit of everyone. - The people who don't want another topic will largely be unaffected by its addition. It's not going to be death by a thousand papercuts, nor will it diminish the list traffic. If this is truly a worry, then let's institute a policy: If any one topic consumes 30% or more of the list traffic then consider splitting it up to encourage more finely tuned discussions and on-topic discourse. If a topic is under 5-10% of the list traffic then combine it with another topic. This will, in practice, limit the number of natural topics to always fewer than 20 (in the worst, unlikely, case) and generally fewer than 5, of which no more than 3 topics with "high" traffic will exist. - The people who do want another topic will have fewer things to complain about once it is added, but won't stop talking about it until it is created. This is not the first time this has been discussed, nor will it be the last. If there's a official policy in place (such as above) then it need only be discussed when the trigger conditions indicate. - Most people don't have a lot of time to read all the piclist topics, and let's face it - we have the volume of hundreds of smaller lists. By providing more finely grained topics, those that have less time will be able to spend it more effectively. Yes, you say it's 'trivial' to delete or ignore a thread, but that can't always be determined until opening the message, or even reading through 1/3 of its content. This is a waste that can be easily and ready solved by a technological, rather than social, solution. By doing this we should actually get better discussion on *all* the topics, as people with interest and time will devote them to those topics they can best contribute to. But either way, please consider closing the issue sooner rather than later. -Adam PS: Statistics about the statistics - Gleaned from my gmail account I use exclusively for the piclist, could be in error. Numbers are derived from the number of THREADs, not the number of messages. Reader beware. -- http://www.driveslowly.org - save $0.50 per gallon by slowing down.

2008\04\14@133619 by James Newton

Ok, I'm not entirely against adding a new tag. I do have several issues that need to be addressed: 1. The name of the tag needs to be as short as possible. I'm happy with Byron's [OE] suggestion, [SCI] is a close second and [TECHNO] or even [TECH] is just too long. 2. Some CLEAR means of delineating what goes in each topic tag must be found and descriptions that EVERYONE, including the most basic newbie or ESL can understand. Keep in mind this means being able to describe clearly what belongs and does not belong in each of the following PIC, EE, OE, OT not to mention BUY and AD and the little used AVR, ARM and SX tags. 3. The descriptions must not only be clear, they must be SHORT and use SMALL words. People will just not take the time to read long descriptions. 4. Someone OTHER THAN ME or the other existing admins must volunteer to become an admin, (this includes reading a rather lengthy manual) and take their own time to POLICE that new topic. I am NOT willing to do it. Given all of that, here is my best try at a clear and concise description of the forest of tags that a new poster must take the time to understand. [PIC] Only questions or comments about PIC microcontrollers. If it doesn't include a PIC part number or PIC family, do not post it with [PIC]. Do not try to advertise or buy anything in a [PIC] post. [SX] Items specific to the Scenix/Ubicom/Parallax SX microcontrollers [AVR] Items specific to the Atmel AVR microcontrollers [ARM] Items specific to ARM microcontrollers [EE] Electronic or Embedded Engineering only. Posts with [EE] may not be about a microcontroller, but must include something with electrons running around in it. [OE] Other Engineering. Posts related to science, theories, technology, or news. Don't use [OT] if it isn't techie. * [OT] Other topics such as humor, travel, advice, etc... * * NEVER post your opinions as if they are statements of fact without independently verifiable evidence or clinical studies to back them up. E.g. religion, politics, or other contentious subjects are never allowed. [AD] advertisements of a commercial product or service including your opinions or experiences. Don't spam, do post [AD]! [BUY] People looking for parts, equipment, or consultants will use this topic. I personally think that is ridiculous. Asking people to understand and correctly use all those tags is beyond hope. Scott Dattalo and others have expressed that they will not take the effort to turn off the tags other than PIC and possibly will not participate or even leave as a result. Since the ENTIRE point of having the other topics was so that the people who wanted to yak on and on could do so without disturbing the people like Scott who are busy and have only the time for PIC related post, I don't really see the point in continuing here. Not to mention the fact that I'm about totally freaking sick of it. The effort that I put into policing PIC for Scott et all is apparently wasted. I don't have the time, energy, or desire to enforce a "PIC and nothing but PIC list" for the purists. The other tags are there as a relief valve to allow those who simply MUST yak on about non-PIC issues to be able to do it without disturbing the purists, but if the purists can't allow that... Atlas shrugged. -- James.

2008\04\14@142626 by David VanHorn

> 4. Someone OTHER THAN ME or the other existing admins must volunteer to > become an admin, (this includes reading a rather lengthy manual) and take > their own time to POLICE that new topic. I am NOT willing to do it. Russel?

2008\04\14@144427 by Rolf

David VanHorn wrote: >> 4. Someone OTHER THAN ME or the other existing admins must volunteer to >> become an admin, (this includes reading a rather lengthy manual) and take >> their own time to POLICE that new topic. I am NOT willing to do it. >> > > Russel? > Poor guy is asleep..... must be. ;-) 6:43 AM. Rolf

2008\04\14@183838 by Jinx

Sounds good to me > [EE] Electronic or Embedded Engineering only. Posts with [EE] may > not be about a microcontroller, but must include something with > electrons running around in it > > [OE] Other Engineering. Posts related to science, theories, technology, > or news. Don't use [OT] if it isn't techie BTW did you mean "Posts with [EE] may not *necessarily* be about a microcontroller" ? At first reading "may not" appeared to exclude any, eg non-PIC, micros although the "but must" hints at the intent

2008\04\14@185508 by Xiaofan Chen

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:35 AM, James Newton <spam_OUTjamesnewtonTakeThisOuTmassmind.org> wrote: > Ok, I'm not entirely against adding a new tag. Good. Finally... > 4. Someone OTHER THAN ME or the other existing admins must volunteer to > become an admin, (this includes reading a rather lengthy manual) and take > their own time to POLICE that new topic. I am NOT willing to do it. I can totally understand the difficulties of dealing with that topic. Luckily Russell would step in to fill the void. {Quote hidden}> Given all of that, here is my best try at a clear and concise description of > the forest of tags that a new poster must take the time to understand. > > [EE] Electronic or Embedded Engineering only. Posts with [EE] may not be > about a microcontroller, but must include something with electrons running > around in it. > > [OE] Other Engineering. Posts related to science, theories, technology, or > news. Don't use [OT] if it isn't techie. * > > [OT] Other topics such as humor, travel, advice, etc... * > > * NEVER post your opinions as if they are statements of fact without > independently verifiable evidence or clinical studies to back them up. E.g. > religion, politics, or other contentious subjects are never allowed. > Please do police [OT]. And please explain what are the "other contentious subjects". Xiaofan

2008\04\14@191332 by Rolf

James Newton wrote: > Ok, I'm not entirely against adding a new tag. I do have several issues that > need to be addressed: > > ..... snipped.... .... may I make a humble suggestion... Perhaps Russell should be given a bigger say in the name and content of this (possible) new tag, and should be the first moderator of it too. That way he gets to sleep in the bed he makes ... Russell certainly appears to be active, knowledgeable, and friendly enough to be nominated for such a role... ;-) Rolf

2008\04\14@201303 by Apptech

> Ok, I'm not entirely against adding a new tag. I do have > several issues that > need to be addressed: As brief as I ever can be ... :-) 1. Perhaps, subscription is by opt-in. All new subs start with PIC, ADMIN and perhaps OT enabled. Others such as SX AVR etc tbd. EE and ENG (see below) off. Other main tags must be turned on by user. Expect some please-scribble-me posts. Maybe a monthly std email to all covering tags and general list etiquette, as are issued by many lists. Maybe only when the noise levels grows too high. Optional: Anyone who is deemed by admin (or just annoyed admin ;-) ) to have complained too much about actually legitimate posts in a thread have that thread turned off and a message sent. "Dear xxx. Your subscription to tag [ENG] has been disabled. If you wish to re-enable this tag please click on this link. have a nice day." Optional: Complaining about admin actions is grounds for [being hit with a wet fish | being suspended | being subscribbled solely to full- digest mode | other] 2. [ENG] as a new tag. The main progression is then [PIC] [EE] [ENG] [OT] ENG is used because OE is obscure and SCI tends to leave doubt if an engineeringish post may lie between EE and SCI By nestling ENG against EE both are clearly engineering and EE is clearly electrical. If there is any doubt it becomes whether to use OT or ENG and anyone who doesn't closely follow the descriptions may put a scienceish subject in OT that may legitimately go in ENG. Nobody is liable to complain about this and if the poster is not passionate enough to push it up into ENG then nobody suffers too much. I would happily police the ENG upper and lower boundaries in a polite manner. Standard messages would probably help SO PIC Clear - Police with extreme prejudice EE Must be electrically related. Engineering content also STRONGLY desired. eg introduction of a new semiconductor device is fine. USE of a new ... is even better. Police with polite prejudice ENG MUST have engineering or science content. eg about things which we observe and which are NOT dependant mainly on their people content. OT Defined by what is NOT allowed anywhere. Russell

2008\04\14@201721 by James Newton

Good point. How about: [EE] Electronic or Embedded Engineering only. It is ok for a post with [EE] to not be about a microcontroller, but it must be about something with electrons running around in it that a hobbyist could possibly build. -- James {Original Message removed}

2008\04\14@204139 by Jake Anderson

I don't think you need the bit about the hobbyist, it makes it somewhat more ambiguous. (see video of the guy who made his own vacuum tubes ;->) Stuff with electrons in is a good place to start. I think most people would be clever enough to be able to determine what would fit into EE and into some other Eng category. Regarding the purists, make the default subscribe only to PIC and ADMIN. opt in rather than out. James Newton wrote: > Good point. How about: > > [EE] Electronic or Embedded Engineering only. It is ok for a post with [EE] > to not be about a microcontroller, but it must be about something with > electrons running around in it that a hobbyist could possibly build. > > -- > James > > {Original Message removed}

2008\04\14@204339 by James Newton

Mailman (the software used by MIT to host this and many other lists) does not allow for a new subscriber to have anything other than ALL the topics turned on. It is up to the subscriber to turn them off. Even more annoying: Us list admins can NOT turn on or off users subscriptions to topics. Only the subscribers can turn topics off. I don't mind ENG Your descriptions are, in my opinion, very unclear. -- James. {Original Message removed}

2008\04\14@204504 by John Chung

James, How about driver development which tag should it be? Regards, John --- James Newton <.....jamesnewtonKILLspam@spam@massmind.org> wrote: {Quote hidden}> Good point. How about: > > [EE] Electronic or Embedded Engineering only. It is > ok for a post with [EE] > to not be about a microcontroller, but it must be > about something with > electrons running around in it that a hobbyist could > possibly build. > > -- > James > > {Original Message removed}

2008\04\14@205752 by Apptech

> Good point. How about: > > [EE] Electronic or Embedded Engineering only. It is ok for > a post with [EE] > to not be about a microcontroller, but it must be about > something with > electrons running around in it that a hobbyist could > possibly build. This discussion would be valuable ON EE as it's about EE. It needs, I think, to clearly allow professional level stuff that is outside amateur scope. Informing people of the achievements of the art seems a good way to inspire. I don't mind if this isn't agreed to but feel it would be a loss. eg DC-DC 500 MW +/-500 KV links Power satellites (if they ever happen) And the very small: Jinx's recent memory technology that may one day replace Flash - they have so far built a 3 bit register! Russell

2008\04\14@210011 by Apptech

> How about driver development which tag should it be? > > Regards, > John I'd say EE. I'm happy to be counter-suggested. It involves doing things with electrical things. James - Can we move this to EE and even back post what's been said so far - especially your original post? Russell

2008\04\14@210431 by Jinx

> [EE] Electronic or Embedded Engineering only. It is ok for a post > with [EE] to not be about a microcontroller, but it must be about > something with electrons running around in it that a hobbyist could > possibly build. "Hobbyist" is a good excluder for power stations, spaceships, solar arrays that cover a whole desert, etc whilst still including PSUs, amateur rocketry, domestic solar panels and installations etc [EE] topics could still include discussion of techniques used in large scale or specialised professional projects (for example sensors - gyros, A2D, temperature etc - and sensor protection or environment) that are of **practical** use to the hobbyist and professional designer and constructor

2008\04\14@211319 by Apptech

> Your descriptions are, in my opinion, very unclear. :-). I suspect that what a person is thinking is strongly linked to what they say so that words that seem clear to them are unclear to others as for the recipient they lack the accompanying 'mental baggage'. This is where example and case study can be useful. And iteration among interested parties to get something that works for all. I think there is some merit in the "mainly involves people" aspect making something OT. Politics, religion, maybe school vouchers, ... have people as the focus. Gun control is people so OT but guns per se is probably ENG. Absolute exclusions probably need revisiting as part of the cleanup. Sex, politics, religion, racism, personal denigration / flaming, ... has been oft mentioned. "Not provable by science" is understood but allows for grey boundaries. There will ALWAYS be grey boundaries. I better say here now so that it can be "critiqued" that something like how science is done by IPCC seems to me to be solidly ENG. ie this is about how the maths and science works. Some will (as always) disagree and clogging up a new system from day 1 with argument is something I'd like to avoid. BTW - somebody (Ian?) suggested quite genuinely that I MAY have engineered this furore in order to try to bring about a new tag. I am entirely happy for him to suggest that that may have been my intentions. BUT I'd like to state that that absolutely wasn't in any way in my mind or my intention in any way. In retrospect, I was unwise to use the heading that I did in the original fateful post. If I'd been a little more circumspect this may not have happened. Russell

2008\04\14@211407 by Apptech

> Ok, I'm not entirely against adding a new tag. I do have > several issues that > need to be addressed: "The admins ascend the crystal stairway to ... " ** :-) I honestly think that this would be a truly positive step for the list. I can see it providing an environment that people like eg Scott can live in without too many problems eg I'd imagine that Scott with PIC and EE enabled would be happy enough. As ever, I may be wrong. It seems to offer a clarity that has been absent (to we the dim of eye and brain), a separation of key vital areas and an ability for people to tailor content without tags getting so finely divided that the brain explodes. While there are a number of "sub tags" such as SX AVR etc these are both so little used AND well enough known to people who care that most people will not be bothered by them. The "main sequence" of PIC EE ENG* OT should be clear enough to most (he says hopefully) Russell * or whatever is used. ** I was interested to note that only Xiaofan made any mention of this whatsoever ;-)

2008\04\14@213329 by James Newton

Scott will not be pleased. Nor, if I understand him correctly, will Andrew Warren, Nikolai Golovchenko, and Dmitriy Kiryashov. "...all Synaptics' employees like me but one time active Piclist participants, refuse to spend any significant time on the Piclist. But we're somewhat weird in that we tend to think towards simplicity rather than complexity." -- James. {Original Message removed}

2008\04\14@213334 by Robert Ammerman

> [EE] Electronic or Embedded Engineering only. Posts with [EE] may not be > about a microcontroller, but must include something with electrons running > around in it. Er, well, except for some plasmas and degenerate matter, just about everything has electrons running around in it :-) And yes, I know, that was originally my own description of the topic. And yes, I know what James really means. As I am sure do we all. --- Bob Ammerman RAm Systems

2008\04\14@213334 by Robert Ammerman

> [OE] Other Engineering. Posts related to science, theories, technology, or > news. Don't use [OT] if it isn't techie. * > I am sure James meant "Don't use [OE] if it isn't techie." -- Bob Ammemran RAm Systems

2008\04\14@214000 by Robert Ammerman

>> [EE] Electronic or Embedded Engineering only. It is ok for a post >> with [EE] to not be about a microcontroller, but it must be about >> something with electrons running around in it that a hobbyist could >> possibly build. How about "what at least one poster to the thread, or his company, could possibly build". -- Bob Ammerman RAm Systems

2008\04\14@214025 by Roger, in Bangkok

Hhmmm ... well some may proffer that the staircase was not successful because of the properties of the crystal, but rather due to the magnetic properties within the crystal's supporting structure. Sorry, Russell ... hehehe, no I'm not :-)) Regards/Roger, in Bangkok On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Apptech <apptechKILLspamparadise.net.nz> wrote: {Quote hidden}> ... > "The admins ascend the crystal stairway to ... " ** :-) > > ... kerchunk ... > > Russell > > ... > ** I was interested to note that only Xiaofan made any > mention of this whatsoever ;-) >

2008\04\14@220209 by Apptech

> Scott will not be pleased. Nor, if I understand him > correctly, will Andrew > Warren, Nikolai Golovchenko, and Dmitriy Kiryashov. Maybe Do they subscribe to [EE] now, or [OT]? If to PIC only then no change seen. If to EE as well then it will get much "cleaner". If to OT as well then ??? If to all but they want the content to reflect their desires and won't turn off tags then ... . R

2008\04\15@072338 by Forrest W Christian

Ok, I'll add my $0.02.... I agree that we need one (or more) additional tags. The way I see it is that there are actually two tags we need to redefine and split. [EE] to me means questions and discussions about Electronic Engineering, with a pretty wide definition of Electronic Engineering, not really excluding anything which an Electronic Engineer or Electronic hobbyist would deal with on a regular basis. If you touch it or work with it to bring an Electronic Project to completion it's fine. Meaning an occasional "bolts and nuts" or "gears and motors" question would be ok, as long as it's part of some electronic project. I think the real line in my mind comes down to that the topics in [EE] should pretty much be driven by projects that list members are trying to complete, and not dicussions about current news items or the like (even if they are electronic in nature). I don't particulary want to see discussions on [EE] about some news article about some researcher somewhere who has figured out how to do lighting at 99% efficiency. Now if someone on the list is *building* such a beast and trying to figure out X that's different. The origin of most, if not all [EE] threads should be a practical question about X, not a "what do you think about news release X" or similar. [OT] to me means things which aren't Electronics or Electrical or Engineering or Science or similar. Truly off topic, and although perhaps interesting to those on the list, not science, Engineering, or similar. My proposal is that if you look at my long rambling discussion of [EE] you will see that I excluded news releases and similar. Looking back at the threads that I think most that care have issues with (and I do to some extent) are the ones which are not really questions, but instead open discussions about science and engineering "news" or events. I think the problem is that there is really no home for discussions about things like a new satellite being launched, or a new type of nuclear reactor, or debating the merits of some new technology, or one of any similar type of discussion. For that reason, I would propose that the definition for the split between the existing [EE] tag and the new tag [OE] be more based on the type of thread (answering a question versus discussing a news article or general subject), than on the specific content. (Note that I'm not saying that [OE] is the best tag for this, or even that [EE] is the correct tag going forward). Not to reiterate too much, but some samples of discussions and where they would fit: [EE] Which FET should I use? [OE] NASA screws up launch again! [EE] Glue for mounting circuit boards? [OE] new type of LED released [EE] source for mechanical parts for my robot? And so on.... If you'll look back through the [EE] threads which have garnered complaints, you'll find that they fit into the "news release" category and not the "list member asking a question about something they are doing" category. -forrest

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2008 , 2009 only
- Today
- New search...