RE: UKHA_XBOX ?

["Mark Hetherington" <mark.egroups@xxxxxxx>]

Keith Doxey wrote:
> How about a generic reuseable group....
>
> UKHA_HOT_TOPIC :-)
>
> When a particular topic dies down it moves back to the main list.

I suggested such an idea a while ago as a solution the fears of list
splitting but at the time it went down like a lead balloon. It does seem
that people have suggested similar, or recalled previous suggestions
along those lines, during the course of discussion, so I would add my
support to such an idea. BTW, I do not wish to claim credit for the
original idea since others may well have suggested it before I did, I
mention it merely as introduction to why I have some detailed thoughts
about such a step :)

In essence, I feel that such a system would create a pressure valve for
the list. Given the current support for such a system, a few thoughts to
flesh out the proposal:

1) There will be members that feel it will still split the group and
they want to receive everything. It is simple to subscribe to both for
those people and far simpler than subscribing to several groups. We have
had numerous lists over the years and now have at least two lists on
completely different servers with a different interfaces (tivo and xap).
Splitting discussion has worked in the past while this particular format
reduces multiple splinter groups. People can also tune in to the latest
hot topic and turn it off should it be of no interest to them without
having to establish filters client side which are defeated with each new
post on the subject.

2) Following on from 1 there will be the issue of posting to the wrong
group about the hot topic. The reduction in traffic to the main list
will likely not draw the same (if any) criticism as the whole of the hot
topic being on the main group. Most traffic is generated by replies,
which by the nature of email replies, will direct to the correct list.

3) The current hot topic may well justify it's own list and the hot
topic list would be a useful "proof of concept" system to
establish the
need for a dedicated list. Although there are some redundant splinter
lists, some have gone on to prove their requirement for a dedicated
list. A twin list system offers a way to prevent propagation of the
splinter group beyond the ukha membership so where a dedicated list
might become unfeasible, it will not mean that subscribers to purely a
splinter group are suddenly left without a list. (This assumes some sort
of privacy setting in Yahoo which will prevent people knowing of the hot
topic list prior to joining the main group but given the transient
nature of the hot topic list will likely remove the issue even without
such a setting)

4) The current hot topic could be added to the yahoo signature (with the
group info etc) and possibly on the welcome email for newcomers and Mark
M's website for those that might want to dip into the current hot topic
discussion. This creates a little extra work, but the proposal is only
mentioned as potentially useful.

5) I am not sure if John ever got his bulk buy list working again so we
also have a potential bulk buy list for the inevitable flood of posts
that such discussions create. (I do recall the resons for the non-Yahoo
variant for bulk buys so again this would depend on a privacy setting)

6) Should there be a time when there is no particular hot topic
underway, but certain members wish to continue a discussion that draws
requests for off list discussion, it could be redirected to the hot
topic list. This is not meant to suggest an equivalent of a ukha_flame
list. This allows the moderators a way to direct a generally unpopular
discussion to an accessible point rather than merely having the option
of outright closure.

7) If a member wants to make an entirely off topic discussion during hot
topic downtime, they can make a single post to the main list inviting
discussion and it continue on the sub list. So an occasional drunken
night, cheesy chips, the BMW phenomenon, sci fi babes and all the other
fun stuff that sometimes attracts criticism have somewhere to invite
discussion. (No offence is intended to the participants in such threads,
I merely mean to quote examples that have drawn criticism at some point)

(Note 6 and 7 may well deserve their own list but for the time being
could merely utilise the dead time of hot topic and be subjected to
point 3 to determine the need)

8) There may need to be an exemption clause or extended allowance for
say current events (e.g. WTC which created a very hot topic for obvious
reasons), however, should a current event discussion be prolonged we
have the option of the hot topic list. IME current event discussions on
list prove to be very short lived while some fail to appear. I do not
expect it to be an issue long term, but have considered the potential
for issues that should not be classed as hot topic if they have a
predictable lifespan.

9) To avoid a loss of email on the current hot topic, announcements for
the move could be timed. E.g.  discussion of X is classified as a hot
topic from a given time. This would allow anyone not subscribed or with
email turned off to enable it. The required timescale would likely be a
matter of experience with hot topics. Since it is comparable to previous
creation of a separate list, it is unlikely to be a problem should the
timescale be short or even immediate.

The main issue would be establishing the point at which a given subject
becomes a hot topic which will likely need handling on a case by case
basis. We might be able to establish some form of base point that with
time will transfer topics prior to list members complaining about
traffic on list.

An obvious advantage of such a system, is that discussions about list
splitting will reduce dramatically helping the overall traffic level for
the list.

I am sure others have input on any plan to move to a two list system and
may well have thoughts on issues I have not considered in my post.
Hopefully my thoughts are useful in member's consideration of the
proposal.

Mark.