Posted by J on March 19, 1999 at 13:58:51 {MWrEF4/YdaJ9k}:
This is a gem I have kept from when I ran my own discussion group (circa 1988). This version is updated. While humorous it does exemplify the inherent difficulties of running a discussion group.
Q: How many online discussion group participants does it take to change a light bulb?
Answer: 1,343 -
1 to change the light bulb and to post to the board that the light bulb has been changed;
14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light
bulb could have been changed differently;
7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs;
27 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs;
53 to flame the spell checkers;
41 to correct
spelling/grammar flames;
6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb"; another 6 to condemn those 6 as anal-retentive;
156 to write to the list administrator about the light bulb discussion and its inappropriateness to
this mail list;
109 to post that this list is not about light bulbs and to please take this email exchange to litebulb-l;
203 to demand that cross posting to grammar-l, spelling-l and illuminati-l about changing light bulbs be
stopped;
111 to defend the posting to this list saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this mail list;
306 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light
bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique and what brands are faulty;
27 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs;
14 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and the post the
corrected URL's;
3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this list which makes light bulbs relevant to this list;
33 to link all posts to date, then quote them including all headers and footers and then
add "Me too";
12 to post to the list that they are unsubscribing because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy;
19 to quote the "Me too's" to say "Me three";
4 to suggest that posters request the light bulb FAQ;
44 to
ask what is "FAQ";
4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago on Usenet?"
143 to ask "what's Usenet?"
SO which of the above 1,342 people are posting off topic? For this group I think we could add two more:
1 - to claim that the astrology charts were wrong therefore the lightbulb was changed at another date
and
1 - will make continuous predictions about when it will be changed again
J
Have a great weekend all!! (and for you Aussies -
have a good Sunday!)