Sending following again; original came defective.
==========
---------------------
Forwarded message:
Subj: Testing this piece of mail
Date: 94-10-01 15:47:23 EDT
From: [log in to unmask]
To: Robt Baron
Responding to msg by [log in to unmask] (Charles
Desmarais) who states:
>I also find the cute jokes, poems, etc. to be unnecessary and
inappropriate
>to a professional forum. Send them to your friends, or join
one of those silly
>chat forums on Compuserve, etc.
Charles Desmarais takes the mission of listserv mail groups
much too seriously. I believe that the great service that
museum-l supplies is more akin to a magazine that has been
crafted to serve the varying and multifarious needs of many
people interested in museum topics.
Certainly serious subject are discussed. But there are all
kinds of serious discussions. Some may concern contemporary
issues, others may be about techniques and procedures. I
needn't belabor the point here; the proof is in the wide range
of topics found in museum-l. There is even room for humor
(indeed it is often needed)! Poetry too is useful if it makes
a point. (A bit of self interest here.) Personals of a sort
can be tolerated: "looking for information on;" "help me find
so-and-so."
The only area in which I agree with Mr. Desmarais is in the
area of obviously personal communication that should be
addressed to individuals. And of course the requests for
maintenance of one's museum-l account; that too has no place,
except when it appears through ignorance or exasperation.
Wrongly addressed missives may however be partly attributed to
the pecularities of mailing programs used. Some will
automatically address a response to the museum-l list, while
others pick out the address of the individual contributer. If
contributers were to sign their contributions with their name
and electronic address, that, I'm sure would help some.
In the beginning, when I first joined this list I was
downloading the mailing in batch mode. I found that it was a
really simple matter to go through the batch (sometimes over
100k large) with a wordprocessor, search the threads, save the
items I wanted to keep, and then delete the entire batch. This
procedures worked quite effortlessly and resulted in my reading
only about ten-percent of the notices. Perhaps those who find
the list too crowded could change their retrieval method.
Robert Baron
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
Robert A. Baron, Museum Computer Consultant
P.O. Box 93, Larchmont, NY 10538
[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]
----------------------- Headers ------------------------
>From [log in to unmask] Sat Oct 1 15:46:27 1994
Received: from pipeline.com by mailgate.prod.aol.net with SMTP
(1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA22357; Sat, 1 Oct 94 15:46:27 -0400
Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
Received: from pipe1.pipeline.com (pipe1 [198.80.32.41]) by pipeline.com
(8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id PAA23746 for <[log in to unmask]>; Sat, 1 Oct 1994
15:46:03 -0400
From: "Robert A. Baron" <[log in to unmask]>
Received: (rabaron@localhost) by pipe1.pipeline.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id
PAA21117; Sat, 1 Oct 1994 15:46:01 -0400
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 1994 15:46:01 -0400
Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Testing this piece of mail
AOL-Member: robtbaron
|
