You're Right -- It was HARSH -- NOT!

[Mark Swindell]

I agree with Rob's points.  Without filtering, today's spam-filled 
email, in general, could never work, split list or not.  With filtering 
and the delete button I don't have to read anything I don't want to.  I 
don't have the energy to go all over the web looking for the 
appropriate list for this or that.   And I often enjoy reading people's 
insights and opinions about development tools in general terms, not 
just scripting solutions specific to Rev.

Mark

On Dec 13, 2005, at 8:19 AM, Rob Cozens wrote:

> Dear Ken, et al:
>
>> I'm not saying that a thread won't or shouldn't evolve (devolve?)
>> into a philisophical or business acumen-related discussion; it's just 
>> that
>> as soon as we notice we've gotten off track, we should either take the
>> discussion offlist, or to another list, or end the thread, so that the
>> primary purpose of the use-list can remain focused on technical issues
>> related to using Revolution.
>
> I think splitting the List is a mistake.
>
> No one is forced to read every post on every subject.  I have Eudora 
> deliver all my use-rev mail to the trash.  I read the threads and/or 
> responders whose opinions I have found worth reading, transfer any 
> messages I want to keep to another mailbox, and when I quit Eudora the 
> rest is gone.  I doubt I read half of the posts I received this 
> morning.
>
> You can already see the effects of list-splitting in today's mail: an 
> eConversation among long-time correspondents turns from technical to 
> philosophical, and someone posts "take that to another list."
>
> Imagine, if you will, that we are a team of programmers working 
> together on a long-term project.  What kind of synergy develops if 
> every time someone brings something personal or not directly 
> project-related into the conversation, another person responds, "I'm 
> not interested in listening to the rest of you discuss this, so [as 
> Judy so elegently put it] piss off."
>
> People who come to the List only wanting free help with Revolution 
> programming ought to accept desire of those who provide it to discuss 
> other issues among themselves on the same list.  If a thread evolves 
> from technical to philosophical or humorous, it's because some members 
> of the List want to continue the discussion in that vein.
>
> The only reasons I see for not letting a thread run its natural course 
> are:
>
>         * Collaboration on a long-term project, or ongoing subject 
> (eg: rev_ipc group)
>         * The same two or three people continue to discuss a subject 
> while no one else participates.
>
> I said it to the HyperCard List and I'll say it here:
>
> The best way to end a thread you are not interested in is to delete 
> the messages on the subject unread and get on with your life.
>
> Rob Cozens CCW
> Serendipity Software Company
>
> "And I, which was two fooles, do so grow three;
>  Who are a little wise, the best fooles bee."
>
>  from "The Triple Foole" by John Donne (1572-1631)
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>