Re: On on/off topic

[Litgo@aol.com]

Brad, re:

>Sure, but if you had your druthers, wouldn't you want to remove the
>ads?  Every reader recognizes that the ads are a necessary evil.  If
>there was a reasonable way to get rid of them, wouldn't you?
[snip]
>To sum up my main points:
>1) Rich's idea of what consitutes a good list is different that the
>way this list works, but it isn't nuts, it's a perfectly workable
>alternate style.
>2) The official description of this group makes a newcomer expect
>something more content restricted.
>
>Therefore:
>The official description should be changed?

Do we really have to be so pedantic about this? A better description than a
newsletter is to consider this forum a running conversation. If we were all
sitting in a bar (those of us of age or with good IDs) we would not have a
moderator guiding us along in the direction of our conversation, and, most
definitely, we would constantly stray "off topic."

If you'll notice, most (not all) of the tangents were begun as just that:
tangents -- from a who or who-related conversation. The basis of this group
is the Who. But the Who and discussions thereof can lead to many different
subjects. If all the messages on here were "hey, I heard John Entwhistle and
Roger Daltry are playing in Snyde Park -- anyone know where that is???," I,
for one, and I would guess, most others, would not spend their time, energy
and internet subscription money here for more than a week.

Now, I'll admit, I could not care less about Star Trek. But does that stop me
from having a meaningful discussion about Pete's amplification system (which
has been accused of being 'un-who-related'? I can certainly use my sense of
judgement to skip over the Star Trek discussions, if I so desire. I think
others can do the same. Those on the digest, all you have to do is scroll
when you see something that doesn't interest you. 

As was so eloquently put by WFang, this forum is what we make it. If the
constant participants (this purported middle 50 or so constant posters) are
left to their ways, we are certainly going to stray on tangents. We can't
discuss endlessly the same topics over and over again just for the sake of a
few occasional posters who haven't anything to add, who-related or otherwise.

For those of you who feel this forum is heading in the wrong direction, it's
up to you to guide it's change toward the type of forum you want it to be.
Invoking a pious attitude about others' contribitutions and calling for
"den-mother" moderation will only lead to more off-topic posts, such as this
thread, and, IMO, a considerably less compelling forum in which to discuss
the who, let alone anything else.

Litgo