From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,fca456da8e6ec463
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-02 14:46:57 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!supernews.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.isc.org!news.gnac.net!uunet!sac.uu.net!usenet.rational.com!not-for-mail
From: "Mark Lundquist" <mark@rational.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Latin and other irrelevant topics
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 13:46:51 -0800
Organization: Rational Software
Message-ID: <95fbit$nen$3@usenet.rational.com>
References: <mailman.980514018.8909.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <94s5iq$rdk$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3A720BAE.4060204@acm.org>
 <3A72D99C.D7B062B3@acm.org> <94vnon$kgj$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <u8znw3vuy.fsf@wanadoo.fr> <952i6j$nv5$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <9534fn$5nt$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ext-3074.rational.com
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:4884
Date: 2001-02-02T13:46:51-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


<dejmej@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:9534fn$5nt$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <952i6j$nv5$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>   Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > There seem to be quite a few people who like
> this thread,
> > including many CLA regulars. So I think it is
> more reasonable
> > that those who DON'T want to read it simply
> kill the thread,
> > than demand it stop.
> >
> > As I said before, the only thing that worries
> me is when a
> > legitimate discussion goes off topic, but I
> really can't see
> > how anyone can object to a thread with the
> above subject.
> >
>
> Which may be decoded to be an allowance to
> discuss anything on comp.lang.ada as long as the
> thread is popular with an extensive participation?

That's the idea! :-)

As long as the normal etiquette of indicating the off-topicness in the
Subject line, I don't see a thing wrong with it.

One convention found in some newsgroups is to prefix subjects with "OT" for
"off-topic".  Will tolerating these threads cause our signal-to-noise ratio
to plummet?  No, because the discussion will dry up and blow away on its own
if it doesn't get critical mass.  Most of these originated in some relevant
thread, and only after we've gone down a rabbit-trail for a few posts and
are still going strong is the subject line changed to indicate that it's
taken on a life of its own as an off-topic thread.  So if I were to start a
thread on "The secret life of lint", or "Broccoli: large vegetable, or tiny
tree?" it's unlikely that it would be sustained.

I've really enjoyed following this "Latin..." thread.

It's also interesting to see how these threads often have a way of working
themselves back to being on-topic.


:-)
Mark