[Consim-l] CBI Games?

[Mike NotSpecified]

I'm with Markus, give me a mailing list any day.  I used to have my email 
program set up to automatically drop all consim messages into a folder, sorted 
by topic.  When I had a moment I could open the folder and read all the 
messages on a given topic in order.  If there was a topic that I wasn't 
interested in, it only took a couple of messages to make it clear I could 
delete the whole group.  That was a really efficent way to keep up, and every 
so often somebody would post something on a game I had never heard of, get me 
intrigued and I'd end up with a new game!

Now, when I get interested in a new game and go over to consimworld and find 
3428 unread messages in that games folder I have to decide how many hours of 
wading through chitchat I'm willing to go through to learn about the game 
(yes, I know how to use the outline function).

Moving this list to yahoo has been proposed before, I don't really care where 
it gets hosted, but the issue will be, where on yahoo?  There already exists a 
consim group (which has nothing to do with wargaming).  There is already 
boardwargaming, avalonhillgames, avalonhillplayers, etc.  Which is my point. 
 Having 20 different groups on more or less the same topic is far less 
preferable than one list.

But since I hear no nominations for me as Wargaming Communications Czar I'll 
stand down.  Thanks for listening.

(now I'll share my secret strategy for improving commuiucations anyway.  I've 
been in the habit of posting my AARs and Reviews here on consim and at BGG. 
 Then I drop Alan a note to invite him to scoop them up for Grognards, and if 
the publisher has a discussion board I go over there and post a message with a 
link to Grognards.  To this I think I will now add additional posts on as many 
of the yahoo groups as it seems relevant that there is a really cool article 
at Grognards and BGG they may be interested in, and while they are at it, they 
might want to subscribe to consim-l.

So my pledge is to create "the action" here on consim, and do what I can to 
let other people know this is where the action is.  I hope you'll join me!)


On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 00:59:33 +1030 (CST)
  Markus Stumptner <mst at cs.unisa.edu.au> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Allan Rothberg wrote:
>> Alas, single channel servers, like this mailing list, are a lot more
>> vulnerable to flame wars and off topic postings as there is no way to
>> avoid those distractions except by selectively paging past them. What's
>> more, there is no way to partition conversations, and that may be worse.
>> If, for example, a thread opens up here on ASL, and I happen to have no
>> interest in ASL, I have to wade through all the ASL posts and try and
>> spot the posts that are of interest to me.
> 
> On the contrary - you may have to wade past the subjects, but not through
> the posts. One of the main advantages of mailing lists over a CSW style
> forum.
> 
>> There's not much recourse to
>> that, however, short of splitting up a single mailing list into dozens,
>> or even hundreds of specialized mailing lists and then you are back to
>> the CSW model.
> 
> I find this rather ironic since so much of CSW is offtopic chatter
> regardless of where one goes, and so many flame wars going on.  I've come
> to the conclusion that flamewars and noise just go hand in hand with a
> large subscriber population. We had people who kept complaining on CSW
> about the flamefests on this list for years, long after the volume had
> gone down and the flamefests had moved over to CSW.  BGG is a bit more
> civil but in exchange it's far more clueless and inane in general.
> 
>> Is there a solution? I dunno. I do continue to subscribe to this list,
>> perhaps simply for nostalgia's sake, although the occasional gem does
>> pop up from time to time.
> 
> I don't think there is a solution, really. But it's not, in my opinion, a 
> crippling problem. 
> 
>> Perhaps we can redefine the use of this list for an On the Table/After
>> Action Reports mailing list. That is not to say that it can't also
>> continue to be used for other purposes as well.
> 
> Sorry Allan, but I see no point in a redefinition.  We get a few posts per
> month, and then the solution is to slice it more thinly?  Some people post
> their replays here anyway if they want.  Personally, I have little enough
> time to even play so there's not many replays to post. But I'm not going
> to post more just because more basic design discussions of the type that
> Mircea likes to kick loose are no longer consider on-topic.
> 
> Ultimately, the condition will not change. If one wants to see more 
> postings of type X on a particular forum (list or otherwise) the fastest 
> way is to start posting them. :-)  People may take this up or not, but 
> at least there will be a seed to grow on.
> 
> Ironically, low-volume discussion websites suffer even more from this. At
> least with a mailing list you see all the posts.  A CSW-style multi-folder
> interface makes it seriously painful to find the bits that actually have
> new traffic. (Been there, done that.)
> 
> Markus
> 
> Last 3 games played: Ligny (NLC), Borodino, Air Cav
> --------------- http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/mst/games/ ---------------
> "Bakayaro! Bakayaro!"  ("Stupid Bastards!  Stupid Bastards!") -- Admiral 
> Aritomo Goto's last words to his staff, October 11, 1942
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Consim-l mailing list
> Consim-l at mailman.halisp.net
> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/consim-l