|Topic:||Re:Relevancy of posts|
I appreciate your efforts to keep these discussion on a productive track. It can be tricky to balance quality with relevance to a large audience.
As you might guess, I see enormous value in consistent application of what might appear to be the most boring NLP pattern ever created: the well-formed outcome. As someone with a lot of experience in conflict resolution, I find the unflashy outcome procedure one of (if not the) most powerful tool that I know.
In your original message, you define three criteria for determining "relevance."
In my continued mission to explore strange new discussion groups, I would propose the following challenge to members of these discussions:
Define a sensory-based evidence criteria for a "quality post" to this forum.
|Topic||Date Posted||Posted By|
|Relevancy of posts||05/11/2002 03:13:01||Web Master|
|Re:Relevancy of posts||06/11/2002 19:19:17||ulic|
|Re:Re:Relevancy of posts||06/11/2002 21:39:15||Michael Carroll|
|Re:Re:Re:Relevancy of posts||08/11/2002 00:30:39||Ulic|
|Re:Re:ReRe:Re:Relevancy of posts||08/11/2002 01:01:46||SNL|
|Re:Re:Re:ReRe:Re:Relevancy of posts||08/11/2002 01:56:44||Ulic|
|Re:Relevancy of posts||06/11/2002 19:41:22||Dimitry|
|Re:Relevancy of posts||08/11/2002 02:05:32||Joseph Stalin|
|Re:Re:Relevancy of posts||09/11/2002 03:18:08||Ulic|
|Re:Re:Re:Relevancy of posts||09/11/2002 03:43:16||Joe|