Phillip Vogel wrote:
> What a pain in the butt. How about this for a possible scheme: The PICLIST is
> for discussion of topics specifically related to PICs. Anything else should be
> discussed in a different list or newsgroup.
>
> C'mon, liquid level sensing? truck tachometers? These both had [PIC]: labels.
Both projects were being controlled by PICs, so yes. Though the subject
did wander a bit from the PIC itself, so perhaps should have been retaged
as EE.
> Unfused toner? yeah, maybe EE, but barely.
Unfused toner being used to make printed circuit boards. Most definitely EE.
> It was MUCH quieter when I could
> just filter out [OT].
And you still can.
> If this doesn't make sense, then I suggest that we include tags for every
> usenet newsgroup [alt.binaries.my.whole.hard.drive]:, [sci.electronics.cad]:
> (now there's a novel place to talk about cad systems).
>
> My point is, I subscribed to the PICLIST to get and share PIC information.
> Mailing list software (and mail reading software) is just not sophisticated
> enought to try to replace usenet, which is what you're trying to do with all
> these tags. Sigh...
And you are welcome to turn off all topics other than the PIC topic. You
will then no longer receive anything not marked with the [PIC]: tag in
the subject line. To do so, send a message to: spam_OUTlistservTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu
You may put anything in the subject line - it gets ignored. In the body
of the message, put:
set piclist topics: [PIC]
and you will have your wish.
<rant>
And no, we're *not* trying to replace Usenet with these tags. We set up
the server this way so that those like you who don't want anything but
strictly PIC-related posts would have an easy way to filter tham out. The
*server* does all the filtering for you. No extra load is placed on your
email client whatsoever. Whereas the list server is perfectly capable of
doing the filtering directly.
Using these tags also retains the random BSing that gets spawned by many
threads. That quality is common to nearly every list that I am subscribed
to. Last time I counted, I'm on close to thirty different lists. And
that random BSing ocurs on nearly every one of those lists. This is a
*community*. Random conversation occurs in a community. And by providing
a sanctioned outlet for that BSing through the [OT] tag - which any that are
not interested in may *easily* filter out - I can hope that the sense of
community here on the list will be strengthened.
</rant>
--
Mike Werner KA8YSD | "Where do you want to go today?"
| "As far from Redmond as possible!"
'91 GS500E |
Morgantown WV | Only dead fish go with the flow.
I like the idea of the other tags but I'm not sure of the utility of the
[PIC] tag. Shouldn't that be assumed to be default? Maybe I'm missing a
point.
> And you are welcome to turn off all topics other than the PIC topic. You
> will then no longer receive anything not marked with the [PIC]: tag in
> the subject line. To do so, send a message to:
> .....listservKILLspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu
> You may put anything in the subject line - it gets ignored. In the body
> of the message, put:
> set piclist topics: [PIC]
> and you will have your wish.
>
If you had the default set to no tag at all, then the system would be
pointless. All the OT's AD's and EE's that people forget to tag will end up
in your inbox, even if you want PIC stuff only. The point is to try and
help everyone. People can target their posts to the correct audience, and
everyone can choose what, and what not recieve from the list server.
I find it very usefull, even though I have chosen to receive everything,
having a definate tag in the subject makes sorting my mail that much easier.
I have it set so that each topic goes into a different folder. That way I
can read all the PIC stuff, and scan through the other stuff and quickly
delete anything that dosen't interest me.
> I like the idea of the other tags but I'm not sure of the utility of
> the [PIC] tag. Shouldn't that be assumed to be default? Maybe I'm
> missing a point.
>
Indeed, you are missing the point. Currently, there is only about
20% of messages which are even remotely related to pic. Most of
the rest are not related to pic, so it would be foolish to have a
default to [PIC]: Maybe the default category should be [OT]: The
[EE]: category runs a close second to [OT]:, but actually there is
very little in this category that actually has to do with electrical
engineering. I propose a new category which should now be made
the default. The [BS]: category. This way, if you dont put a [*]: tag
on the message, it will have a much higher probability of being
categorically correct, right off the bat!
I propose a new category which should now be made the
default. The [BS]: category. This way, if you dont put a [*]: tag
on the message, it will have a much higher probability of being
categorically correct, right off the bat!
Isn't that the way it actually IS working, with the slightly
different default catagory of "[Other]:" ?
BillW (who is happilly continuing to get and skim everything.)
> >
> Indeed, you are missing the point. Currently, there is only about
> 20% of messages which are even remotely related to pic. Most of
> the rest are not related to pic, so it would be foolish to have a
> default to [PIC]: Maybe the default category should be [OT]: The
> [EE]: category runs a close second to [OT]:, but actually there is
> very little in this category that actually has to do with electrical
> engineering. I propose a new category which should now be made
> the default. The [BS]: category. This way, if you dont put a [*]: tag
> on the message, it will have a much higher probability of being
> categorically correct, right off the bat!
I think Don is way off beam here...
I hate to be a kill joy but the PIC runs on electricity and is subject
to the laws of physics.
It can fail to function as desired due to wrong capacitor selection,
static discharges, EMI, overheating, low voltage etc etc etc.
Also.. it has been known that some people (call them strange
maybe) actually use PICs to control other devices like LCDs,
frequency synths, motors, solenoids even Christmas tree lights.
The OTs are not about knitting or great railway bridges of Britain,
they mostly revolve around electricity, comm standards and the
like.
I would add that most really good ideas for equipment is often
serendipitous.
_____________________________
Lance Allen
Technical Officer
Uni of Auckland
Psych Dept
New Zealand
Just leave the tags as the are, don't invent to many tags.
[PIC] Is really not necesarry. But is mostly software related. No tag
simple means it's PIC related. This is the lists name right? This
includes wachdog setup, RS232 setup PID software design. etc.
etc.
[EE] is for Electronic stuff directly related to PIC. This includes
power supply problems, capicators, board design etc. etc.
hardware PID setup and design.
[OT] is just way offtopic like How to draw a line in VB. :-) If you
need to know how to draw a line on a LCD screen, it just's belongs
to PIC ofcourse. Need a multi tasking kernel? Just as it to [PIC].
the PIC-list for me is
1) Software [PIC] or nothing
2) Hardware [EE] or nothing
3) Other stuff [OT]
But mosty it's commen cense!
Filtering is UP TO TO CLIENT, NOT TO THE LIST SERVICE!!!!!!
Nowday's every system has a way for filtering e-mail. For unix use
procmail, for windows use outlook, p-mail or all those other clients.
A tag siply makes it easy to filter out stuff. Creating many tags is
just confusing.
If we really want to set a filter on the server side I would deside this:
1) If the server finds a tag, a reply will send to the sender.
2) If the server does not find a tag, a reply is send to the list.
If you don't use the [PIC]: tag, expect some people who're filtering out
everything BUT the [PIC]: tag, to not see your post, and the
autoresponder (looks like I'll be doing that!) to harass you for posting
without an appropriate tag. (this post, for example, would get ME
harassed, All by itself isn't a valid tag, should be [All]: instead.)
All tags need a colon after them, and include square brackets.
The tags let us filter for non-digest, non-index people, at the list
server - we Admins have to stay open on all topics, of course - Someone
who's paying $$$ per day for their e-mail because the only internet
access they have is DirecPC with a cell phone call-in, or has only the
option of a 9600 baud, long distance radio modem connection in Ghana
that costs too much, can cut down on their PICList e-mails thus their
expenses. My brother once was stuck paying too much once (only ISP he
could reach was long distance!), unfair to stick people with messages
they don't want, so we've set up filtering.
>
> This is what I would do.
>
> Just leave the tags as the are, don't invent to many tags.
> [PIC] Is really not necesarry. But is mostly software related. No tag
> simple means it's PIC related. This is the lists name right? This
> includes wachdog setup, RS232 setup PID software design. etc.
> etc.
>
> [EE] is for Electronic stuff directly related to PIC. This includes
> power supply problems, capicators, board design etc. etc.
> hardware PID setup and design.
>
> [OT] is just way offtopic like How to draw a line in VB. :-) If you
> need to know how to draw a line on a LCD screen, it just's belongs
> to PIC ofcourse. Need a multi tasking kernel? Just as it to [PIC].
>
> the PIC-list for me is
> 1) Software [PIC] or nothing
> 2) Hardware [EE] or nothing
> 3) Other stuff [OT]
>
> But mosty it's commen cense!
>
> Filtering is UP TO TO CLIENT, NOT TO THE LIST SERVICE!!!!!!
> Nowday's every system has a way for filtering e-mail. For unix use
> procmail, for windows use outlook, p-mail or all those other clients.
> A tag siply makes it easy to filter out stuff. Creating many tags is
> just confusing.
>
> If we really want to set a filter on the server side I would deside this:
> 1) If the server finds a tag, a reply will send to the sender.
> 2) If the server does not find a tag, a reply is send to the list.
>
> Ries
--
I re-ship for small US & overseas businesses, world-wide.
(For private individuals at cost; ask.)
Mark Willis wrote:
> If you don't use the [PIC]: tag, expect some people who're filtering out
> everything BUT the [PIC]: tag, to not see your post, and the
> autoresponder (looks like I'll be doing that!) to harass you for posting
> without an appropriate tag. (this post, for example, would get ME
> harassed, All by itself isn't a valid tag, should be [All]: instead.)
Uh, actually All: *is* valid and [All]: is *not* valid.. The only reason
the other tags (i.e. [PIC] [EE] [AD] and [OT]) have the[]'s around them
is that's the way I configured it. The topics All and Other are system
defined, and can't be redefined by us.
--
Mike Werner KA8YSD | "Where do you want to go today?"
| "As far from Redmond as possible!"
'91 GS500E |
Morgantown WV | Only dead fish go with the flow.
Umm... actually, All: is a valid tag and [All]: is not. We only kept the
[]'s for the existing tags so that people who had already set up rule based
sorting, etc... of the messages could continue to use that. The []'s are a
pain to type and really not necessary for topic tagging since the tag must
always be at the start of the subject line and separated by a colon. They
ARE necessary for email clients to filter/sort since there is typically no
support for detection of tags via position in the subject line.
So the list of possible tags is (again):
All:
which I was sort of hoping that everyone but the admins would not find out
about or, in general, not use 'cause it can't be filtered out. It should
only be used for posts that are of importance to everyone on the list and
which really can not be ignored.... um... like this one... <GRIN>
mitvma.mit.edu
