[Biopython] some eye opening stats

[Chris Fields]

On Dec 17, 2009, at 1:08 PM, Steve Lianoglou wrote:

> Hi Istvan,
> 
> On Dec 17, 2009, at 1:47 PM, Istvan Albert wrote:
> 
>> Hello Everyone,
>> 
>> So I ran some statistics on this group (see below) that includes the
>> entire past year. Make you own decisions based on it.
>> 
>> Here is one of my observation:  I find it saddening that I made the
>> list at number 18!  That's some niche list where one person posting
>> ten messages in a whole year gets to be at number 18. In fact I only
>> need three more posts to make myself top ten poster! Would you still
>> claim this to be a good way to establish, grow and interact with a
>> community?
>> 
>> I said this many times before, and I'll try for this to be the last
>> time I bring this up:
>> 
>> I believe biopython is a niche software tool because *YOU* are
>> limiting its reach *YOURSELVES* by making inappropriate decisions as
>> far as accessibility and community goes. It will stay so as long as
>> you don't recognize and act on this.
> 
> I haven't said much so far because (1) I'm not really actively using biopython atm, and (2) I'm largely indifferent about the choice of mailing list vs. web interface, but let's be serious here ... how can you be so confident in drawing any causality between your stats and the fact that biopython is using a mailing list?
> 
> You're arguing that since you are at # 18 w/ only 10 posts, it must be due to discussion about this project is confined to a mailing-list instead of a more "open" and "accessible" web group and the community needs to "act now" or ignore this at its peril.
> 
> Try doing the same experiment with the bioconductor mailing list, or (depending on how bold you're feeling)  the R-user mailing list. Discussion on both groups is via mailing-list only (or through gmane --- same can be said with this list) and come back with that report.
> 
> Now, go try your same experiment on the networkx or igraph user group. Both are hosted on google groups. With 10 posts, you'll likely be somewhere in the top 10 posters for the year.
> 
> Oh, even better: igraph just set up the mirror-do-hicky-whatever so you can access their mailing list via GG sometime in July:
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/network-analysis-with-igraph/browse_thread/thread/77305d9b6bc6d35/c6a694e287936049?lnk=gst&q=google+groups#c6a694e287936049
> 
> Perhaps you'd like to see how traffic has changed on that list before and after that fact. I'm going to guess it wasn't by all that much, but that would at least be a better experiment you can use to base your hunches on.
> 
> -steve
> 
> --
> Steve Lianoglou
> Graduate Student: Computational Systems Biology
>  |  Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
>  |  Weill Medical College of Cornell University
> Contact Info: http://cbio.mskcc.org/~lianos/contact

This also doesn't factor participation via other means, such as other mail lists, IRC, etc.  As an example, the Perl Moose mail list is fairly low traffic, with a few posts a week, but the IRC channel is much more active.  Conversely, we in BioPerl tend to use the mail list over #bioperl (though I do use both if time permits). 

I think way too much time has been pushed into this topic, considering we've reached a pretty viable option, namely mirroring the list to Google Groups.  That seems satisfactory to everyone.  I fail to see the reason to press the issue (and everyone's ire) more?

chris