Re: Proposal to use LISTSERV topics
Patrick Lam (PLAM@MUSICM.MCGILL.CA)
Wed, 9 Nov 1994 19:09:39 EST
>I can't see the need for these at all. We need to keep a global
>perspective on Scouting and that does _not_ allow filtering at
>the heading stage.
I wish everyone else could do that too. Unfortunately, it seems
that some people have a choice between NO list and a filtered list.
They either don't have the time, or it costs them money to receive
mail. :( It's definitely a plus to keep everyone in, but I don't
think that is an option for some people.
Personally, I will continue to read all my SCOUTS-L mail. It
works for me. And I can read/reply to those who write only
on specific topics, too, and they'll read what I say. It leaves
things more open that people leaving the list and forming narrow lists.
>From a parochial point of view, there is no designator suggested
>for New Zealand and with the limited number of topics available,
>there couldn't be one. Please do not lump us in with Australia
>as we are two countries separated by 1200 miles of water. That
>is half the distance between the East and West coasts of the USA,
>or the distance between England and Turkey. There would be many
>other countries too which are strong in Scouting and would miss
>out on having a unique topic.
Canada got lumped in with the USA, and there's a little difference,
to say the least, between our programmes. :) I think that compromise
is the key word here.. It's a tool to help people manage their mail
size, because they can't go through everything, not a value judgement.
>Besides, for those like me, who get downloads from the list in
>digest form, the designators wouldn't reduce the size of the
>downloads and would be of little use in determining whether to
>skip the posting or not.
I suspect that LISTSERV filters out mail by topic, even for digesters.
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City