[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Why not a newsgroup?

I think Eddi has covered it pretty well.  It may be interesting to note
that I found this list with no outside help or advice.  I just did a search
on the WWW using a standard Netscape feature, and came across the Audi home
page (well, not the official one).  It directed me to the list, and the
rest has been an incredible source of information and talent close at hand.

My point is, if someone is an enthusiast, they will find this list.  Those
are the people I enjoy having access to.  I suggest we leave it alone; it
will grow whether or not we change it.  Let's let it grow naturally for a

> > ... I like the informal way that I found out about
> > the quattro list.  I posted a request for information from r.a.vw and some-
> > one told me about the list.  I don't have time to even look at the usenet
> > any more.  I'd like to think that we are interested in more than just spam-
> > ming, getting our "electronic DNA" spread around the world.
>This sems to point out the basic question that needs to be asked- what
>are our metrics for success? That would determine our strategy for change
>(if w'all want to). So, is bigger better- total number of posts? Is it fame
>or fortune we seek? It's difficult to discuss the pros and cons of any
>change if there is no consensus on success criteria, but here's my rough
>examples of where we are (our baseline metrics?):
>       1) (80 percent of posts that) share technical knowledge or pricing
>          (backed with experience- see 4 below)
>       2) (Practically non-existant) postings of flames (we can argue 3rd
>          degree burns). Many soapboxes stood upon, strong opinions, but
>          respect for others (even empathy, esp. when the Audi god is
>          upset ;) ) is always present.
>     >> Ummm... can you define Adults?? Im not sure I qualify yet... Im the
>     >> right age, but....!
>        (Bob, partly qualifies us all as adults, you included)
>       3) 50 percent of all questions over-answered. We'd either anticipated
>          the persons next questions, or spelled out detail and background
>          material that would make Data proud (when his EmoteChip (tm)
>          properly kicks in that subroutine).
>       4) 30 percent sharing of experiences that can't be bought.
>       5) 5 percent junk posts- all those will be worth something if
>          directed to majordomo.
>       6) Personal one- I cubby-hole about 15 percent of all posts, and I
>          consider myself fairly selective. I read over 85 percent of them
>          to completion.
>The percentages are really rough, but metrics have to indicate a measurable
>level. This is also top-of-the-head stuff, but I'll bet it's enough margin
>to use for the next step:
>     Anyone care to make estimates on the above if we go usenet?
> > Maybe that wouldn't happen with r.a.m.audi (or whatever) and maybe I'm
> > just an old fart that is afraid of change.  Who knows?
>I'm not old (I keep telling that to myself, anyway) and I'm afraid of change-
>change that wasn't well thought out. Sorry to throw in the old school of
>the "Quality Process" (okay, I'm not sorry), but we're in a pretty stable
>state, so it's allowed to introduce change. If we really want to start this,
>I just want to make sure that we measured what we got now, so I'll know how
>much it stinks ... er, changes, later, then see if all the instability to
>come was worth it.
>-- Eddi
> > Steve Buchholz
> > s_buchho@kla.com
> > San Jose, CA (USA)
> >
> > ... still thinking it's probably a bad idea ...

Richard Funnell, OES
tel. (408) 992-2265
fax. (408) 746-7633