Subject Re: [IB-Architect] A redefinition, please!
Author Helen Borrie
At 10:13 PM 18-06-00 -0400, Claudio wrote:
> Hello, I'm in good mood as always even if my words seem harsh. It
> takes an
>inordinate effort to make me to catch fire, so you can trust that I have the
>head cool yet.
> This is Helen's naive charter for this list:
>This community is an IBDI forum for discussing details and issues regarding
>the architecture of InterBase - classic versus superserver, as well as the
>implications of IB's multi-generational architecture.

In view of the breadth of debate that has evolved since the list was set
up, I shall go and change the charter to encompass these wider matters of
interest. However, I will stick firmly to not accepting support questions,
since the reason for starting these lists was to deflect architectural
discussions from the main support list. Mers is still THE place to go for
IB support.

I, too, have observed the (apparent) reluctance of earlier contributors to
join in the discussions recently. The number of subscribers continues to
grow and there have been no unsubscriptions. I interpret that as a message
that I need to continue to remind contributors that we need to be
respectful and considerate when we respond to postings.

I don't want to see any rules that palisade discussions within boundaries
dictated by our ISC colleagues. Let me, as Moderator, decide to request
that a topic be diverted elsewhere if I think it is inappropriate to our
forum. If you see a thread that you don't want to engage in, please just
refrain from engaging in it.

We do not need pre-defined formats for postings. All posters can help to
avoid long-running, diversive threads by following three basic rules of

1. Keep postings short and to the point.
2. Post multiple questions separately, one message per question, with an
appropriate Subject.
3. Change Subject names when you spin the discussion away from the
original Subject.

> I ask publicly Jim and ISC people (starting with Ann, of course)
> to help
>redefine the objective of this list. This way, we'll avoid one of the causes
>of clashes here.

I ask publicly that Jim and the ISC people don't perpetuate this dwelling
on the misfortunes of the last couple of weeks. Please communicate with me
and Claudio privately, if you wish, but keep this channel clear for the
important matters it was created for.

Thank you all.

"Ask not what your free, open-source database can do for you,
but what you can do for your free, open-source database."