|From:||Ali Hashemi <ali.hashemi+ontolog@xxxxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Tue, 27 Jan 2009 12:58:36 -0500|
Not sure how much extra work this would create,|
But there is a third option of having a sub-forum where things are vetted.
For example, right now we send to "ontolog-forum@..." we could have an additional "ontolog-forum+vetted@..." where messages to the latter are indeed vetted.
If people find the general threads too much to wade through, they could set up a client side filter.
Alternatively, extending John's idea, messages could also be simply tagged after the fact (tho one would have to visit the forums @ ontolog for this type of filtering).
As it stands, there does seem to be a lot of "noise" that one has to wade through to get to interesting signals :P.
My three cents,
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Azamat <abdoul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I can believe reading this.
_________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (01)
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: [ontolog-forum] Tighter control of ontolog forum?, Todd Schneider|
|Next by Date:||[ontolog-forum] What is an Ontology [was - Re: Is there something I missed?], Peter Yim|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: [ontolog-forum] Tighter control of ontolog forum?, Azamat|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [ontolog-forum] Tighter control of ontolog forum?, David C. Hay|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|