Latest addition: A bondi-blue iMac

Jay West jwest at
Sat Jul 2 11:43:21 CDT 2016

Js wrote...
Otherwise, someone (the list owner?) has to pontificate over a list of acceptable computers.  Good luck with that.
Actually, given the number of years (decades) of doing exactly that - I have had very good luck with that and it has worked well. But since it's subjective, it's easy to "move forward".

The issue is - setting a specific age, or a specific list of computers, or any one of a number of objective criteria - will leave some people out, and may well need to change over time. And if there is a specific list, any time a change is suggested there will be endless (and flammable) debate. One example - there are machines that I would now consider ok topics for discussion here that I would have never allowed 10 years ago. There are also machines that I would find it hard to believe would ever be on-topic, no matter what their age. Another example - if a longtime listmember that always discusses and contributes well to very on-topic machines one day asks a question about an intel i7 machine - I'm likely to let that slide. A specific list or age precludes that. 

As a result, what I have done and will continue to do - is make a subjective assessment based on the specific post, what I suspect most of the listmembers feel at the time, the posters proclivity for off-topicness, etc. This is one of those cases where I think subjectivity on my part makes for a better community and user experience than a hard and fast list or age cutoff. If I am (or ever) start doing a bad job of that the users will leave in droves, or stage a mutiny - which I'd deserve at that point.

My own (current) thought is that whitebox PC's will never be on topic. Maybe one or two someday might be considered historically important in some way, or have introduced a feature that became important, or gathered a specific following. But that day isn't today. We'll see in another 5 or 10 years perhaps.



More information about the cctalk mailing list