>
>----------
>There has been discussion about breaking up Museum-L into more specialized
>groups (including a CIDOC list for museum documentation). When these proposals
>first flashed by I did not think it was the way to go, but now that my service
>provider has said they can't support the cost of the number of messages coming
>from Museum-L, I wish there were smaller lists that I could continue with.
>
>Perhaps this could also be taken as a caution to keep the amount of fluff in
 the
>list to a minimum; personal replies, messages that should have gone to the
>listserv, replies which quote lengthy messages that have already been
>distributed, all add cost somewhere, even if in most cases the user of the list
>does not foot the bill.
>
>If you respond to this message, I would appreciate receiving a copy, since I
>won't be getting it from the list. No listserv is better than no e-mail at all.
>
>       jim swanson | whyte museum of the canadian rockies | banff, alberta
>                          [log in to unmask]
>
>
 
 
I agree. We should have more specialized discipline or specialization-based
lists.  I also think Museum-L or some other general list should also exist
but the existance of specialized lists might decrease the amount of "fluff"
and also the amount of stuff that is of interest only to particular
specialists greatly.
 
I look forward to any proposals for more specialized groups.
 
Kerridwen Harvey, Museum Consultant
[log in to unmask]