> in general, it looks as if individualism won the poll against formalization. > Although most of the people who voted were positive for both keywords and > the poll run by a list member, very few peple actually sent me a vote.
> In detail:
> 1. Introduction of keywords? > yes: 13 no:1
> 2. Polls run by a list member? > yes: 11 no:1
> On Monday, Dec 7, 385 people were subscribed to the old list.
> A summary of comments:
> An argument against keywords was "Professional development and continuuing > education requires effort. Period." > It was noted that there must be some common place where the keyword list > is stored for look-up. > It was suggested that contact problems should be in the keyword list. > A discussion of the pros and cons of more than one keyword was sent to the > list as well. It was noted that more than one keyword makes sense, but for > the mail tools which sort your mail, only one keywords is better. > One was concerned that no development of discussion could happen in a vote > that is not 'public', and that someone might not tell the truth about the > results, in order to support his own - minority - opinion.
> Conclusion:
> Although some of the more prominent problem-solvers active on this list, > e.g. John Swanson, voted for keywords either to my address or to the list, > there are too few votes to declare it a standard. So the only thing I can > say is: Do as you like, and perhaps 350 people are laughing because they > think that the poll was a stupid idea anyway.
> However, most of the people who told their opinion were positive to the idea, > so feel encouraged to give keywords a try and see how things develop. Same > for the poll issue.
> Here is the list of keywords again:
> MODEL - selecting, creating, deleting etc. entities, > coordinate systems, meshing, element properties > CAD - interface to other programs > APDL - pure language issues like strange behaviour, > possible bugs, parameter or macro problems
> THEO - theory, proper problem representation in ANSYS
> SYS - OS and licence trouble, file and memory issues
> ADV - coupled field, optimization, adaptive meshing, > submodeling and -structuring etc.
> CONT - contact trouble
> For the beginning, I would like to see one keyword or no keyword, because > - mail filtering is easier to apply then; > - its kompatible to problems that don't fit; > - its kompatible to members who don't like keywords; > - its kompatible to members who don't know the right category; > - a forgotten keyword doesn't matter.
> It would be more difficult to have no, one or more keywords to my mind.
> Regards and thanks for voting,
Dear Heinrich,
First of all I apologize I'm part of the individualists, neverheless I would like to spend my cent about this. I think that every effort in organizing is really appreciable but you can't force different users (researcers, simple users, advanced users, developers, and so on) to use this approach. I think that the variety of people visiting this list is one of its more valuable carachteristics but someone access the lists a lot of time in one day, oterhs only now and then.
What I would like to say is that I don't find strange that people like the "blessed" John Swanson (I remember that he already sent a message inviting us to write clearer subjects) encouraged your initiative but also that in my rigid rules are not suited for this list.
At last I would like to thank you for clarifying subjcts. I'll use them hereinafter and I'll post you if I find interesting new ones.
Regards
Roberto Muccini
> Heinrich Acker
> Institut f. Halbleitertechnik (Solid-State Electronics Laboratory) > TU Darmstadt (Darmstadt University of Technology) > Schlossgartenstr. 8 > D-64289 Darmstadt