On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Kyle Banerjee <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> In every "noisy" forum that I participate in (BTW, none of them are tech or
> even work related), there are always people who dislike the noise. The
> concerns are analogous to the ones expressed here -- irritation  factor, it
> keeps people away, it's all about the "in" crowd, etc. Likewise, the
> proposed solutions are similar to ones that have been floated here like
> directing the noisemaking from the main group elsewhere or silencing it.
>
> For things to work, everyone needs a reason to be there. People with less
> experience need access to those who have been around the block. But a diet
> of repetitive shop talk isn't very interesting for people who have a decent
> handle on what they're doing. They need something else to keep them there,
> and in the final analysis, many come for entertainment -- this normally
> manifests itself in the form of high noise levels. But even if people spend
> the vast bulk of the time playing around, nuggets of wisdom are shared. And
> if something's truly serious, it gets attention.
>
> It's far better to help people learn to tune out what they don't like, and
> this is much easier to do in c4l than in communities where interaction is
> primarily physical. All communities have their own character and
> communication norms. It's important for people to be mindful of the
> environment they're helping create, but reducing communication to help
> avoid exposing people to annoyances screws things up.
>
> In all honesty, I think the silliness on the sidelines is far more
> important than the formal stuff. I know I learn a lot more while goofing
> off than in formal channels for pretty much everything I do.
>
> kyle

+1

I'm all for removing specific offended responses and commands as some
others have suggested, but I agree trying to remove some of the
lighter stuff will in the long term, be more likely to be detrimental
then a positive.