I was told a story once (supposedly true) of an architect who was drawing up plans for a university quadrangle. After construction, when they began landscaping it was discovered there were no plans for sidewalks. When the architect was contacted regarding this apparent oversight, he replied that this was intentional; he wanted to allow students to begin using the facilities so he could see where they naturally began creating pathways and use these for determining where to place sidewalks. Thus the new facility ended up with walks where they were actually most useful, rather than where someone “thought” they should be.
I would suggest that we should learn from this tale and suggest we simply utilize the forms of communication which people are naturally migrating towards for ‘official’ dissemination of information. Otherwise this will quickly become ridiculous.
I really don’t give a crap about how long anyone has been online, but I’ve never understood the rationale behind posting at the bottom of an email on a discussion list. It makes anyone reading it have to scroll all the way down to see what you’ve written (as anyone following the thread has almost certainly already read the previous content). It has always struck me as counterintuitive and backward. I only know of a handful of “bottom feeders”, thankfully, but it is pet peeve of mine. ( ;] sorry, Hrothgar!)
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.
"No matter how much you feed the wolf,
he keeps looking at the forest." --Ilse Lehiste