[sf-lug] {crickets} ... list_members -f sf-lug | mail ... Michael.Paoli at cal.berkeley.edu ...

Michael Paoli Michael.Paoli at cal.berkeley.edu
Sun Feb 1 12:45:52 PST 2015

Well, regarding:
> Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2015 00:59:36 -0800
> From: Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com>
> To: sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> Subject: [sf-lug] On hearing the sounds crickets make
> Message-ID: <20150201085935.GK9525 at linuxmafia.com>
> However, metaphorically speaking, hearing 'crickets' means hearing
> silence where a response was expected or (at bare minimum) socially
> appropriate.
> I've asked a number of questions to SF-LUG folks in honest and, I think,
> reasonable expectation of response.  Often, that's been in the really
> January 2015
> I just ran this manually:
> # /var/lib/mailman/bin/list_members -f sf-lug | mail -s "sf-lug  
> Roster as of $(date +%F)" Michael.Paoli at cal.berkeley.edu
> I _could_ add Michael Paoli as a recipient of that mail weekly (Sundays)
> via cron job, as Jim already is a recipient.  Would that be to your
> liking?
> {crickets}

Yes, got the (manual) roster - thanks, and have been planning to get
back to you on that one ... no extreme rush (I figure if it gets
covered once a month, that's much better than past, ... and we're not
yet near one month since you manually also sent me the roster).  I've
in mind something for you to implement that's just about that easy (one
more command in pipeline), but I need to still do more prep work on the
receiving end.  Then ought be able to automate the receiving end ...
and have it automagically placed somewhere more fitting than my email,
and more regularly.  And if I don't have that ready within about a
month's time, then I might ask for a monthly emailing to me as interim
solution ...  but why ask you to do two things, when I might need only
ask you to do one?  :-)

And if I emailed you/list my thoughts/plans/intentions in advance, true,
would be more responsive and perhaps also relieve a bit of anxiety on
the part of various folks, but then too, it's one more email for
everyone to process, and not (yet) exactly actionable or especially
informative information.  And too, done and done well is often better
received than wishful planning (which often also triggers interim "so,
what's the status on that, is it done yet?  Can I help?  How's it
going?" which on a rather simple task can suck up lots more resource
than doing the task itself.).

... actually, I'm still continuing to think about it ... might also be
yet another way I could automagically regularly get it, that would be
highly easy for you to do on the server side - and might also be simpler
and cleaner for me to implement on client side.

In the meantime I'm not sweatin' it.  ;-)  I'm hoping to have something
in place by not the upcoming regular off-site rotation of the target
(client) host's backup (which is way less than a month after I got copy
of roster), but by the one following that - which is approximately a
month after that (nominally that would be the first Saturday in March).

Can also be much more efficient to not rush into things.  Doesn't work
that way for everyone, but, e.g. if I take some time getting around to
it (but not *too* much), I may think of a better - even significantly
better - way of doing it, before I even start to touch it - as opposed
to jumping in, "doing it", and not long after, realizing there was a
much better, more efficient, and/or easier way to have implemented it.

Oh, and also, some folks (e.g. you!  :-)) are much more adept at
cranking out lots of emails!  ... and it is very much appreciated!

But some of us (and may apply doubly or especially to "spare time")
aren't nearly so adept at cranking out such numbers of separately
written emails.  I often have to trade off reading emails (or attempting
to read/skim most of the emails, or at least those I think I ought look
at, or other tasks that ought be done), vs. emailing responses.  So,
e.g., I'll often not keep up as much as I'd wish to on responses, to be
able to at least more-or-less keep up on reading the stuff coming in
that I'm at least attempting to follow and more-or-less keep up on.
Oh, and oddly, it typically takes me significantly longer to write a
shorter email than a longer one (go figure).  Yes, English was always my
weakest subject (e.g. in school all straight As in high school ...
except some Bs in English, and somehow squeaked by the University of
California's English graduation requirement (tested out of it - passed
... written "paper" (Blue Book) exam ... and everything I wasn't sure
about the spelling of, I wrote a synonym or synonymous phrase I knew
(or thought I knew) the correct spelling of) ... one of many reasons I
went a career route (technical, electronics, computers, Unix/Linux
systems administration and some programming) that's not (quite so) heavy
on the English writing ... but alas, still gotta do some (the
technology isn't yet advanced enough for some neural interface to do
the writing (and editing!) for me.  Maybe I'll get around to that some
day ;-) ... but too, would definitely need a good English editor to
make sure what came out of it was quite correct and proper).

Folks also take up information at different rates in different forms
(and even subject matters!).  E.g. I can generally suck up the technical
quite well in most forms.  But, e.g., "force" me to read _The Great
Gatsby_ and I can read it cover to cover (and even reread the same page
many times) and ... interest about zilch ... retention likewise.  And
then the teacher would test us on a whole lot of details in the book -
amazing I managed to even get Bs.  And then that teacher would drone on
about the lovely cocktail parties we'd go to discussing these "fine"
English works ... never been to such a party, never would want to, I
don't even drink.  I think I should've told the teacher about the fine
technical events she'd been depriving herself of, and that's where the
coolness is at ... but if I had, I probably wouldn't have even gotten Bs
in her class.

More information about the sf-lug mailing list