--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity" > <ruthsimplicity@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000" > > <steve.sundur@> wrote: > > > > [I wrote:] > > > > I wish Lawson were still here. > > > > > [Rick wrote:] > > > > Invite him back. 50 per week, though. > > > > > > What I wonder is whether Lawson directed his incessant posting to > > > another venue or just stopped cold turkey. I can't say that I > > > have been missing him. > > > > I don't know if I dare to ask, but how long have all y'all been > > talking with each other? Is there much repetition? > > "Y'all" who, the participants on the forum in general? > > FFL was started in 2001, either shortly before or shortly > after 9/11. But people join and then drop out all the > time, so the population isn't constant. (I started > posting here in May 2005, as did a few others who had > been regulars on alt.m.t, including Lawson, who dropped > out this past summer because he felt unappreciated.)
Uh, not quite the whole story. Lawson was in the habit (which he claimed was due to a disorder) of posting impulsively and often, literally hundreds of posts per week. So, to a slightly lesser degree, did Judy and (to an even greater degree) did Shemp. The FFL community reacted to being "drowned out" by these compulsive posters and created the 35- post-per-week maximum. Both Shemp and Judy paid lip service to this maximum, while often going over the limit. (Until recently for Judy, when Rick finally put some "teeth" into what happens if you go over the limit.) Lawson never even *tried* to control or limit his posting. He just split before the first week of posting limits went into effect. He may *claim* that he left because he "felt unappreciated," but that is far from the whole story. > There's some repetition, but not a whole lot, I'd say. > Certain topics come up over and over again, but the > substance tends to be relatively new each time. Or not, depending on the person viewing the Department of Redundancy Dept. discussion. :-) In other words, some people can argue about the same thing for years and claim that every iter- ation of the argument is slightly different. What an unbiased observer might notice is that the person claiming subtle differences really *has* been arguing the same topic endlessly for over a decade. Again, just presenting a slightly different point of view on the subject, to present more of the "whole story."
