new to the list

From: D. Peschel <dpeschel_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Sat Jan 9 14:06:03 1999

> Understood. Me, I'm interested in the exchange of technical information,
> and as I suggested above, it might be argued that the volume and variety
> of discussion is going to make the list a less-than-satisfying thing for
> people with specific interests.

Many of the people on the list are in the same category. In other words,
the list (which is supposed to be very single-minded) contains a number of
people who actually are single-minded (Tony Duell, Allison Parent, Megan
Gantry, Pete Turnbull, maybe others). This is good! Don't misunderstand
me. It's the way it's supposed to be.

The problem is that I'm not very single-minded. :)

> Might I respectfully suggest that, in the absence of aggressive subject
> management by the owner, the list would be better broken into four, say:

> That's admirably democratic of you, but impossible in practice. It's
> really just a job for one individual's discretion, and I have no reason
> to not trust yours.

I think you're right about it being my job, but I think what you really need
to respectfully suggest is that the owner start owning the list.

We've discussed creating a parallel list for off-topic stuff, which might be
nice but may well backfire. It's a lot simpler just to keep things on topic.

-- Derek
Received on Sat Jan 09 1999 - 14:06:03 GMT