PICLIST admin stuff

[Dan Smith-11]

I'd like to welcome Bob Blick and Russell to the admin team as list
moderators :-)

We've set up another topic tag called [TECH] which Russell has agreed
to police (along with [OT]).  Bob will be helping to police the [PIC]
and [EE] tags.  This will allow us to refocus some of the other tags.

** Please note that if you want to receive [TECH] posts and you don't
receive the daily digest version of the Piclist, you will have to
visit <http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist> and opt in. **

The new topic definitions effective immediately are:

[PIC]
Should be at the start of the subject line for most postings to the
PICList. This says that a PIC microcontroller (or clone) is directly
involved, connected or the entire subject of the post. Any person who
works with PICs would want to read it...

[SX]
Items specific to the Scenix SX microcontrollers

[AVR]
Items specific to the Atmel AVR microcontrollers

[ARM]
Items specific to ARM microcontrollers

[EE]
The doing of Electrical/Electronic Engineering that you can do
yourself. Power stations go into TECH unless it's a power station that
you can build. So too eg Magnetohydrodynamics etc. Windmill
alternators and related systems and alternate energy at the doing
level go into EE. Windfarms into TECH. etc

[TECH]
About technology, Engineering other than EE, science hard stuff. NOT
the philosophy of science in any depth. New discoveries in QM,
cosmology etc are fine. Almost anything that gets a long thread that
diverges can probably evolve into OT once people know it exists. Those
who care can follow it. eg Global Warming is TECH at the latest
discoveries level but not discussions of "An inconvenient truth" or
"The great global warming swindle" etc. This may rate an occasional
mention in TECH but long ramblings can go to OT.

[BUY]
People looking for parts, equipment, or consultants will use this topic.

[AD]
This is for advertisements of a commercial product or service. Don't
spam, do post [AD]!

[OT]
This label is for posts that are completely off the topic of
engineering/technology. The only things we don't ever want to see are
religious/metaphysical, sex, hate, or political messages.

Hopefully, these definitions are pretty clear, but if you have any
questions please ask away and the admin team will do our best to
answer :-)

Dan
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Dr Skip]

The EE and TECH division are not clear, at least to me. I suggest a long list,
based on the topic headings recently  written (generalized a little perhaps)
over the last few months and post an example list. Since this topic division
obsession tends to create near-online-violence at times, I fear posting unless
there are concrete examples. My Venn diagram of tech and EE overlap quite a bit.

Specifically, what EE topics are TECH and what PC topics go where? Software?
CAD software Q's? Backup software Q's? Engineering software suggestions?
Writing software vs using software? USB design? USB software? USB usage? You
get the idea...


Dan Smith wrote:

> I'd like to welcome Bob Blick and Russell to the admin team as list
> moderators :-)
>
> We've set up another topic tag called [TECH] which Russell has agreed
> to police (along with [OT]).  Bob will be helping to police the [PIC]
> and [EE] tags.  This will allow us to refocus some of the other tags.
>
> ** Please note that if you want to receive [TECH] posts and you don't
> receive the daily digest version of the Piclist, you will have to
> visit <http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist> and opt in. **
>
> The new topic definitions effective immediately are:
>
> [PIC]
> Should be at the start of the subject line for most postings to the
> PICList. This says that a PIC microcontroller (or clone) is directly
> involved, connected or the entire subject of the post. Any person who
> works with PICs would want to read it...
>
> [SX]
> Items specific to the Scenix SX microcontrollers
>
> [AVR]
> Items specific to the Atmel AVR microcontrollers
>
> [ARM]
> Items specific to ARM microcontrollers
>
> [EE]
> The doing of Electrical/Electronic Engineering that you can do
> yourself. Power stations go into TECH unless it's a power station that
> you can build. So too eg Magnetohydrodynamics etc. Windmill
> alternators and related systems and alternate energy at the doing
> level go into EE. Windfarms into TECH. etc
>
> [TECH]
> About technology, Engineering other than EE, science hard stuff. NOT
> the philosophy of science in any depth. New discoveries in QM,
> cosmology etc are fine. Almost anything that gets a long thread that
> diverges can probably evolve into OT once people know it exists. Those
> who care can follow it. eg Global Warming is TECH at the latest
> discoveries level but not discussions of "An inconvenient truth" or
> "The great global warming swindle" etc. This may rate an occasional
> mention in TECH but long ramblings can go to OT.
>
> [BUY]
> People looking for parts, equipment, or consultants will use this topic.
>
> [AD]
> This is for advertisements of a commercial product or service. Don't
> spam, do post [AD]!
>
> [OT]
> This label is for posts that are completely off the topic of
> engineering/technology. The only things we don't ever want to see are
> religious/metaphysical, sex, hate, or political messages.
>
> Hopefully, these definitions are pretty clear, but if you have any
> questions please ask away and the admin team will do our best to
> answer :-)
>
> Dan

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Bob Blick-4]

It's actually pretty easy. If it's something I'd object to seeing in
[EE], then it goes in [TECH]

That was supposed to get a chuckle, c'mon!

I don't particularly enjoy seeing "using PC software" posts. Some of
them are clearly [EE] though, such as CAD footprints and file formats
for PC board houses. Backup software and "Fedora 9 first impression" are
pretty far from [EE] and bore me intensely and probably Russell too.
That's what Linux mailing lists are for.

Don't try to out-think it, we will see how it shakes out, and probably
flesh out the guidelines as the days and weeks progress.

Cheerful regards,

Bob


Dr Skip wrote:

> The EE and TECH division are not clear, at least to me. I suggest a long list,
> based on the topic headings recently  written (generalized a little perhaps)
> over the last few months and post an example list. Since this topic division
> obsession tends to create near-online-violence at times, I fear posting unless
> there are concrete examples. My Venn diagram of tech and EE overlap quite a bit.
>
> Specifically, what EE topics are TECH and what PC topics go where? Software?
> CAD software Q's? Backup software Q's? Engineering software suggestions?
> Writing software vs using software? USB design? USB software? USB usage? You
> get the idea...
>
>
> Dan Smith wrote:
>> I'd like to welcome Bob Blick and Russell to the admin team as list
>> moderators :-)
>>
>> We've set up another topic tag called [TECH] which Russell has agreed
>> to police (along with [OT]).  Bob will be helping to police the [PIC]
>> and [EE] tags.  This will allow us to refocus some of the other tags.
>>
>> ** Please note that if you want to receive [TECH] posts and you don't
>> receive the daily digest version of the Piclist, you will have to
>> visit <http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist> and opt in. **
>>
>> The new topic definitions effective immediately are:
>>
>> [PIC]
>> Should be at the start of the subject line for most postings to the
>> PICList. This says that a PIC microcontroller (or clone) is directly
>> involved, connected or the entire subject of the post. Any person who
>> works with PICs would want to read it...
>>
>> [SX]
>> Items specific to the Scenix SX microcontrollers
>>
>> [AVR]
>> Items specific to the Atmel AVR microcontrollers
>>
>> [ARM]
>> Items specific to ARM microcontrollers
>>
>> [EE]
>> The doing of Electrical/Electronic Engineering that you can do
>> yourself. Power stations go into TECH unless it's a power station that
>> you can build. So too eg Magnetohydrodynamics etc. Windmill
>> alternators and related systems and alternate energy at the doing
>> level go into EE. Windfarms into TECH. etc
>>
>> [TECH]
>> About technology, Engineering other than EE, science hard stuff. NOT
>> the philosophy of science in any depth. New discoveries in QM,
>> cosmology etc are fine. Almost anything that gets a long thread that
>> diverges can probably evolve into OT once people know it exists. Those
>> who care can follow it. eg Global Warming is TECH at the latest
>> discoveries level but not discussions of "An inconvenient truth" or
>> "The great global warming swindle" etc. This may rate an occasional
>> mention in TECH but long ramblings can go to OT.
>>
>> [BUY]
>> People looking for parts, equipment, or consultants will use this topic.
>>
>> [AD]
>> This is for advertisements of a commercial product or service. Don't
>> spam, do post [AD]!
>>
>> [OT]
>> This label is for posts that are completely off the topic of
>> engineering/technology. The only things we don't ever want to see are
>> religious/metaphysical, sex, hate, or political messages.
>>
>> Hopefully, these definitions are pretty clear, but if you have any
>> questions please ask away and the admin team will do our best to
>> answer :-)
>>
>> Dan

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Apptech]

I'll leave this in PIC as Dan started it there and it seems
appropriate that all see it. No doubt future fine tuning of
the OT/TECH/EE divide can be posted on a non-PIC tag.

> The EE and TECH division are not clear, at least to me. I
> suggest a long list,
> based on the topic headings recently  written (generalized
> a little perhaps)
> over the last few months and post an example list. Since
> this topic division
> obsession tends to create near-online-violence at times, I
> fear posting unless
> there are concrete examples. My Venn diagram of tech and
> EE overlap quite a bit.

There will be no violence in [TECH] !!!! :-).
I suggest that you post any EE/TECH uncertain material in
[TECH] and we see what evolves. If something seems to belong
in EE I'll suggest accordingly and we'll see what Bob and co
decide.

At the EE end of TECH there will be no reason for any
'violence'. Anything that strays from EE into TECH will be
most welcome (as I perceive what it's all about) but may be
gently returned to its true home if it seems in the
interests of the majority to have it happen.

At the bottom end OT/TECH it may get a tiny bit rougher but
only marginally so. As I see it (and while I am now named as
an admin (moderator?) I don't see myself largely doing more
than acting as a guiding hand) anything with a GENUINELY
technical content can get at least a start in TECH. Anything
that gets long and wandering or controversial can be ushered
gently into OT. Examples that may go that way include
Cosmology, Global Warming, possibly (possibly) even
Evolution/Intelligent Design. I say 'possibly' for the
latter as, while the subject SHOULD be able to be discussed
rationally and logically, this is almost never what happens,
so if any flame appears then it's off to OT with it.

> Specifically, what EE topics are TECH and what PC topics
> go where?
> CAD software Q's? Backup software Q's? Engineering
> software suggestions?
> Writing software vs using software? USB design? USB
> software? USB usage? You
> get the idea...

IMHO:
I'd say most of that is TECH. I'd be happy for eg Bob to
indicate otherwise.

TECH
CAD software Q's?
Backup software Q's?
Engineering software suggestions?
Writing software vs using software?

EE                   USB design?
EE probably    USB software?
???                   USB usage?



                Russell


--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Apptech]

> It's actually pretty easy. If it's something I'd object to
> seeing in
> [EE], then it goes in [TECH]

Or that I object to :-).
I'm as keen as Bob to see a good EE list now that we have
the capability.

> That was supposed to get a chuckle, c'mon!

Chuckle.


        Russell


--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Jinx-4]

> Specifically, what EE topics are TECH and what PC topics go where?
> CAD software Q's? Backup software Q's? Engineering software
> suggestions? Writing software vs using software? USB design? USB
> software? USB usage? You get the idea...
>
> IMHO:
> I'd say most of that is TECH. I'd be happy for eg Bob to
> indicate otherwise.

I'd suggest that anything to do with Eagle for example would be [EE],
and anything CAD that helps make better PCBs for eg PICs to go on,
or enclosures, machining, milling etc

Not directly related to PICs, soldering, components, etc - [TECH]. If
there is or could be a schematic - [EE]

USB at the electrical level - [EE] or [PIC]. USB as a back-up strategy
for a PC - [TECH]. Unless maybe it's got a PIC in it or it's an [EE] hack
for example, then it could get 'promoted'

Software - hmmm. Directly related to better engineering - [EE]. Win or
Linux as general OS's IMO don't qualify as [EE]. A particular part of
an OS might be appropriate in [EE] or even [PIC], for example specific
s/w, drivers, interfacing (as per USB above), that sort of thing. But
otherwise, probably [TECH]

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Dr Skip]

This would mean the latest "parallel USB" thread would have moved through Ee,
then tech, then pic... Is that the intent? Even through its evolution, it still
had tie-back to the original idea, which was generally, pulling power from a
second port (is it legal, how do you do it, why you do it, can a pic do it).

I found the evolution informative, and the peripheral discussion (not to be
confused with discussions of peripherals ;) very enlightening. It all involved
the same genesis, and from a knowledge management perspective, should probably
stay together. This way, it gets split up as some sort of set of database
entries, without any relations. And with variations in subscriptions to the
various topics, participation would get fragmented.

Perhaps we stay in the original group, even if content evolves? Even though
that wasn't mentioned.



Jinx wrote:
>
> USB at the electrical level - [EE] or [PIC]. USB as a back-up strategy
> for a PC - [TECH]. Unless maybe it's got a PIC in it or it's an [EE] hack
> for example, then it could get 'promoted'
>
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Apptech]

> I'd suggest that anything to do with Eagle for example
> would be [EE],
> and anything CAD that helps make better PCBs for eg PICs
> to go on,
> or enclosures, machining, milling etc

OK

> Not directly related to PICs, soldering, components, etc -
> [TECH]. If
> there is or could be a schematic - [EE]

Um.
I went to disagree and then realised that the statement was
ambiguous.
If you mean "not releated to any of ..." then OK.

> USB at the electrical level - [EE] or [PIC]. USB as a
> back-up strategy
> for a PC - [TECH]. Unless maybe it's got a PIC in it or
> it's an [EE] hack
> for example, then it could get 'promoted'

Yes. A bit vague. It will self clarify.
If in doubt throw into EE and Bob will rule on it ;-).

> Software - hmmm. Directly related to better engineering -
> [EE]. Win or
> Linux as general OS's IMO don't qualify as [EE]. A
> particular part of
> an OS might be appropriate in [EE] or even [PIC], for
> example specific
> s/w, drivers, interfacing (as per USB above), that sort of
> thing. But
> otherwise, probably [TECH]

Largely agree.


    R

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Bob Blick-4]

Dr Skip wrote:
> This would mean the latest "parallel USB" thread would have moved through Ee,
> then tech, then pic... Is that the intent? Even through its evolution

The intent is to keep the quality of the posts high, and allow people to
opt-out of content they don't want.

If you keep the quality high, there won't be complaints about "thread
(de)evolution".

All you have to do is draw parallels in your mind to the [PIC] tag and
how it is not a dumping ground for random thoughts or chit-chat.

Let's wrap this up or take it [OT], OK? This doesn't belong under the
[PIC] tag any more. Thanks.

Cheerful regards,

Bob
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Forrest Christian]

Let me suggest a better clarification:  At least in my mind... although
I'm obviously not the moderator:

If one is building or designing an *electronic circuit* - from concept
through design and production (where applicable), then questions related
to this operation, in my mind belongs in [EE].  That is, it has to do
with the actual engineering.   Electronics CAD/CAM would be [EE],
circuit board design would be [EE], soldering techniques would be [EE],
selection of components would be [EE] and so on.    Or perhaps, put
another way, would this topic be something that an EE would either need
to know, or should know, or has to do to make a circuit or electronic
product work.   I would think of [EE] as the generic workhorse of the
piclist, where people can ask an electronics-related question, and get
an answer.

[PIC], [AVR], etc are more strict interpretations of [EE]... that is,
[EE] to do with a pic or avr processor.  

If the topic does not relate to the actual building or design of an
*electronic circuit*, then this is either [TECH] or [OT].   I have
little desire to try to help define the line between [TECH] and [OT] so
I won't.   Instead, here are a few things I would expect people might
think were EE, but in my mind weren't:  

Not EE: New technology developments, even if they are electronics
related:  X releasing a new processor, Y having some breakthrough which
will affect electronics, etc..  
Not EE: General world news and events
Not EE: Global warming
Not EE: Space events, even that which is electronics related (unless you
are building a satellite or similar)
Not EE: Solar systems, except specific solar system projects (someone
trying to build a charger is [EE], news story about someone building a
new solar charger, not EE).

And perhaps a few grey areas the other way:

[EE] : Sources of Enclosures
[EE] : Adhesives for electronics

And so on...

-forrest
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Apptech]

"Forrest W. Christian" said

> Let me suggest a better clarification:
... snip ...

That whole list of examples looked quite good.
Worth looking at as a guide for anyone feeling bemused.

I was amused to note that

> Not EE: Space events, even that which is electronics
> related (unless you
> are building a satellite or similar)

Meant that probably only Alan Pearce can post on satellites
in [EE].



        R

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Xiaofan Chen]

On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 9:55 AM, Bob Blick <bobblick@...> wrote:
> I don't particularly enjoy seeing "using PC software" posts. Some of
> them are clearly [EE] though, such as CAD footprints and file formats
> for PC board houses. Backup software and "Fedora 9 first impression" are
> pretty far from [EE] and bore me intensely and probably Russell too.
> That's what Linux mailing lists are for.

So at least it will be qualified as [OT], right?

I will continue to opt in [EE] and [OT] thanks to the creation of [TECH]
which I would not opt in.

Xiaofan
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Dan Smith-11]

With the recent changes to the list, I thought it would be good to
clarify who the members of the admin team are :-)

In no particular order,

Josh Koffman
Herbert Graaf
Alexandre Guimarães
Mauricio Jancic
Bob Blick
Russell McMahon
Dan Smith

If you need to contact us, please email piclist-owner@... and your
email will be distributed to the whole team.  With us being spread
around the globe, chances are at least one of us will be awake at any
one time!

Dan

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Apptech]

>> I don't particularly enjoy seeing "using PC software"
>> posts. Some of
>> them are clearly [EE] though, such as CAD footprints and
>> file formats
>> for PC board houses. Backup software and "Fedora 9 first
>> impression" are
>> pretty far from [EE] and bore me intensely and probably
>> Russell too.
>> That's what Linux mailing lists are for.

> So at least it will be qualified as [OT], right?

Maybe not.

They will be welcome in TECH to start and we will see what
people think once the new "sub community" establishes. Just
because something bores me doesn't mean it doesn't belong
:-).

Tag subscription choices are of course up to each member
*BUT* if you get EE and OT now then it will be a really
really really really good idea [tm] to subscribe to TECH for
a while to see how things work out. Failing to do this may
leave you less informed than you wish to be. Your choice &
YMMV.


            Russell


--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Xiaofan Chen]

On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Apptech <apptech@...> wrote:

>>> I don't particularly enjoy seeing "using PC software"
>>> posts. Some of
>>> them are clearly [EE] though, such as CAD footprints and
>>> file formats
>>> for PC board houses. Backup software and "Fedora 9 first
>>> impression" are
>>> pretty far from [EE] and bore me intensely and probably
>>> Russell too.
>>> That's what Linux mailing lists are for.
>
>> So at least it will be qualified as [OT], right?
>
> Maybe not.
>

That is a strange assertion. But since you are now part of
the admin team, I will respect that decision. And I will
just turn off [OT] now that it is of little use to me. [PIC]
and [EE] should be good enough for me.

Xiaofan
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Olin Lathrop]

Dr Skip wrote:
> The EE and TECH division are not clear, at least to me.

Me neither.  I'm rather confused about EE and the purpose of making a
distinction between what you can do yourself versus not.  At some point,
*somebody* is doing all the things that are being done worldwide.  So I can
talk about controlling a 30A relay for a safety shutoff to my home table
saw, but not how a PIC can control a contactor that protects a 750KV power
line?  This doesn't make any sense, especially if I happen to be working on
a PIC controlled contactor to protect a 750KV power line (which I'm not,
this is just a example).  It seems to me the real purpose is to allow
discussion of the things around your PIC even though it's not about the PIC
itself.

I suggest we get rid of EE (since at various times it's been called
Electrical Engineering, then the vague Everything Engineering, and now I'm
not sure what) and replace it with EMB for EmBedded Systems.  This is for
scientific and engineering discussion of the things around your PIC.  If
you're doing a PIC project (or AVR or ARM, etc) and have questions about the
wider system it fits into, then this is where to ask.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
[phone].  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Olin Lathrop]

Bob Blick wrote:
> Backup software and "Fedora 9 first impression"
> are
> pretty far from [EE] and bore me intensely and probably Russell too.
> That's what Linux mailing lists are for.

Hear, hear!  It's about time someone put a stop to that drivel.

********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
[phone].  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist