SNR issues

Twink (
Sun, 30 Nov 1997 18:09:16 -0500 (EST)

At 02:08 PM 11/30/97 -0800, Geoff Smith <> wrote:
>I may be a little premature in saying this (since you haven't given your
>"hows and whys"), but I think this decision may turn some good people off
>extropy. Having to pay to join an institute to participate on a
>discussion has a culty feel to it, even if the justification is to reduce
>the signal-to-noise ratio. Also, I don't think being a member of the
>extropy institute implies you make less "noise." Some people may join the
>extropy institute for the purpose of making some noise on the list.
>Others, who would contribute a lot to the list, may not be interested in
>joining the extropy institute, either for monetary reasons or because they
>do not want to incur the wrath of those who would take out their petty
>frustrations on the members of the extropian movement.(ie. misguided

I tend to agree, but it is ExI's list. And the amount of spam has been, well
not terribly high, more than I expected. Also, moderating the list would be
a full time job. (Of course, it could be distributed.)

I am, BTW, not a member of ExI, so when the list gets restricted I will be
reduced to read=only status.:(

>One restriction I would like to see is allowing only list-members to post.
>Restrictions beyond this may reduce the S/NR, but I don't think the
>reduction noise will be worth the loss of perfectly good signals! ;)

Well, a compromise might be to have an ExI member sponsor someone
to be a participant. Still, this will be restictive, but what does everyone

Daniel Ust