The Coq mailing list

[Matthias Puech <puech AT cs.unibo.it>]

Dear all,
Maybe this discussion indicates the need for a Coq-beginners' list, like 
OCaml has? I'm under the impression that the traffic keeps growing, and that 
threads are most of the time clearly separable between beginner and advanced 
questions. Was this already discussed in the past?
Of course it would mean to think carefully about names, so that beginners 
don't feel left out of the club :)
Best,
        -m

Le 26 nov. 2011 à 15:39, Benjamin Pierce a écrit :

> To be fair, those resources have been politely pointed out at several 
> points in the past couple of weeks, and people including Alexandre have 
> supplemented those pointers with helpful specific responses.
> 
> We do need to somehow maintain a balance between helpfully answering 
> newcomers' questions and allowing the list to become flooded with them, and 
> I think there's a general sense that we've gone a bit too far toward the 
> latter recently.  Maybe it would help if we could articulate some sort of 
> shared expectation about what rate of posting questions to the list is 
> considered appropriate (e.g. something like a question a week, on 
> average?), so that we can politely let people know when they are using too 
> much of the shared resource?
> 
> Another solution is to appoint a few moderators and ask them to undertake 
> this task for the rest of us.
> 
>        - Benjamin
> 
> On Nov 26, 2011, at 9:18, Greg Morrisett 
>Â <greg AT eecs.harvard.edu>
>  wrote:
> 
>> This isn't a very welcoming attitude if you want to grow the Coq 
>> community.  Perhaps we should have some ready canned responses that
>> point people to resources (e.g., the FAQ, SF, CPDT, the IRC, etc.) 
>> but in a polite fashion.
>> 
>> -Greg
>> 
>> On Nov 24, 2011, at 10:55 AM, Alexandre Pilkiewicz wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>> Can we try to stop feeding the troll by answering obviously trivial
>>> questions? No answers are ever read, nor any documentation, advice,
>>> proof, or anything. It's therefore a lost of time for everyone, and
>>> useless noise on the list. And private answers are similarly useless,
>>> since they are obviously not read either, but resent to the entire
>>> list. The only solution is to just bite our fingers, and not answers.
>>> 
>>> Thanks a lot,
>>> 
>>> Alexandre Pilkiewicz
>> 
>