I guess I'm  with Ed with this. These fractured lists don't help get  
input from a wider range of people and even if I wouldn't go to  
c4lPluto I'd still like to know about it. Is hitting a delete button  
that big of deal anymore? If so, I don't see the point of signing up  
for email discussion lists - or at least if you do and volume is an  
issue, modern email clients have filters or free email accounts that  
can br used specifically for email lists can be created. Butaybe  
that's just me and edsu.

Edward

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 7, 2010, at 10:53 PM, Ed Summers <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:43 PM, William Denton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> So far there are just three people with ideas for talks (me, Walter  
>> Lewis,
>> Art Rhyno).  Have the other local chapters found it works well to  
>> have more
>> time for informal stuff, or lightning talks, or "Ask Anything" like  
>> I see
>> NYC is doing?  Sometimes with a smaller group people don't talk so  
>> much, but
>> sometimes they do.
>
> The thing that bums me out is that this discussion list was largely
> created because there were all these discussions going on in niches
> like xml4lib, web4lib, perl4lib, php4lib, oss4lib, etc ... and not
> enough conversation about computing and libraries and
> cross-fertilization between projects/environments.  Now we're seeing
> the code4lib discussion list itself fragment into code4libmdc,
> code4lib-north, code4libnyc, code4lib-northwest, etc.
>
> I guess an argument could be made that the conversations going on in
> this sublists would overwhelm code4lib proper with all sorts of local
> noise. But I think ideally we should have crossed that bridge when we
> came to it. I think if folks on code4lib saw what was going on in
> different locales it would inspire people to do stuff where they are
> too.
>
> //Ed