In 20+ years of being online, I have found that the concept that information should be freely available and widely distributed is a Good Thing.
Hence, I have found that having a group posting to a group is also a good thing. If people don't want to read it, they can hit delete. And since the Yahoo group is going to be not a discussion group, but merely a dispenser of information group, there's no concern about debate on that group.
Furthermore, having said that, the concept of official distribution of information over only an official list versus official information distributed over unofficial lists is really a pointless discussion. I have, in my many offices (since we're using chronology to explain experience) sent information ex officio (or ex cathedra) out to unofficial lists all the time. There's no real reason for an "official" source of news when we have a bunch of "unofficial" ones where official people can distribute information officially. All a separate group does it make it harder for new people and experienced people to find official information.
And sorry, Hrothgar, I'm still a top-poster.
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013, at 10:41 AM, Sakurai no Jirou Takeo wrote:
Maybe not everyone here is interested in receiving the information from the news group? Not everyone who is on the BFS_NEWS list in on the BFS Discussion Group and vice versa. The same thing should apply to here. Now the more vocal here will be all for it I am sure, but it is better group form not to have groups within groups for messaging. I've been on ones that have done that in the past and it just gets all mangled up to the point that people stop using them. At least, that's been my experience over the last 20+ years of being online.
Sakurai no Jirou Takeo (aka Jeremiah Jennings)
Kingdom of Calontir
Barony of Forgotten Sea
Canton of Aston Tor
Argent, a torii gate gules and on a chief wavy sable
three cherry blossoms argent
"No matter how much you feed the wolf,
he keeps looking at the forest." --Ilse Lehiste