Melinda: Well stated!! I think this is a viable and an accommodating plan. Kevin ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: ADMIN: Poll Results on Splitting TechNet Author: [log in to unmask] at PMDF Date: 2/29/96 9:29 AM Dear Colleagues, Of our more than 700 TechNet participants, 200 responded to the poll. Thank you for taking the time to contribute. 15% felt that TechNet should be eliminated in favor of more focused lists 30% felt that we should keep TechNet and *not* offer more focused lists 70% felt that we should keep TechNet *and* offer more focused lists As you can see, some participants were comfortable with more than one option. Only a few people preferred another medium, such as a newsgroup, digest or summary. LONG LIVE TECHNET It was apparent from the votes, and from the comments we received, that the desire to keep TechNet in place as a meeting ground for people in all disciplines of our industry was overwhelming. Typical comments were: "...the essential benefit of TechNet's existence is instant communication between diverse groups that would otherwise not interact, let's not compromise this feature." "(TechNet) allows cross fertilization through the whole manufacturing process. I don't know of any other place where this happens so freely and with so little effort." "...the current format fosters the cross-functional team approach where everyone understands and participates in the challenges facing the entire organization trying to create a finished product. The more I'm made aware of someone else's problems the better I'm able to not make them worse by something I'm doing in ignorance." CREATING ADD'L LISTS Many of the 70% who voted for creating more focused lists preferred to stay with TechNet, but wanted to accommodate the people who prefer to receive less mail. A large percentage of this group wanted to keep TechNet as a master and link it to the smaller, more focused mail lists. The problem with creating additional lists is three-fold: 1. We learned that it is not practical to link two mail lists when we linked TechNet with IllinoisNet. Our efforts to prevent people from subscribing to both failed, they received duplicate e-mails and became frustrated. 2. If TechNet and the focused lists are not linked, some participants are forced to subscribe to several groups in order not to miss information pertinent to their needs. This creates more subscribe/unsubscribe tasks, more administrative and system requirements, and more chance for users to ask the wrong question of the wrong group. 3. Submissions would be sent to multiple lists in an effort to find the expert who can help, thereby increasing the load of participants who subscribe to more than one list. PROPOSED SOLUTION Three excellent suggestions were offered by our participants. 1. Implement a protocol whereby the Subject of each submission to the TechNet forum begins with FAB: If it has to do with fabrication, ASSY: If it has to do with assembly, DES: If it has to do with design, or ADMIN: If it is from one of our mail list administrators, as this message is Participants do not have to read beyond this identifier to determine if the message falls within the disciplines in which they are interested. 2. Recommend that users create a separate "folder" or "mailbox" for TechNet mail so that it is not intermixed with normal work e-mail, and can be reviewed at leisure. 3. Refer those who are interested in specific subjects to the archive of IPC e-mail forum submissions at http://www.automata.com/ipc. 75% of those responding to the survey said they had access to the WWW; others indicated that they hope to in the near future. One particularly wise participant offered, "No matter what you do, not everyone will be happy with it. Good luck." We realize that this proposal requires a compromise on the part of those who wanted to have specialized forums, but we hope that you will give this three-step solution a try. If we all follow the recommendations above, it will -- keep administration to a minimum, -- reduce the pain of those who wish to read less mail, and -- continue to provide access to cross-disciplinary discussion, which many believe benefits the entire industry. Please begin to use the FAB, ASSY and DES protocol now! If you have any comments, forward them to me at [log in to unmask] (though I will be out of the office the week of March 4). I apologize for the length of this e-mail, but the future of TechNet is important to us all and the management staff here at IPC felt that it was important to share this information with you. Regards, Melinda ******************************* Melinda Robinson Director of Publishing and Information Systems IPC 2215 Sanders Road Northbrook, IL 60062-6135 voice 847-509-9700 x314 fax 847-509-9798 e-mail [log in to unmask] URL http://www.ipc.org *******************************