on 3/22/01 9:07 AM, Michael Moore at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Richard... This is no place for flame wars... The thing I like about this
> group
> (and it is the only one I am on for this reason) is that the regular
> participants seem to be possessed of a modicum of good manners and willingness
> to help others out who may not be as experienced as some of the rest of us...
> I
> agree that sometimes the threads on certain topics, both OT and ONT, run a
> little longer than I care for, but that is what my delete key is for... or I
> can politely send a message (which I did once) stating that IMHO the OT thread
> has gone on for too long and could we discuss something else... Another thing
> to keep in mind is that many of us shoot pictures to money, and the questions
> about copyright, or printers, or memory management, are all germane to our
> daily bread... I also welcome posts such as Larry's on Jay Maisel... This
> whole
> rush into the digital era is happening so fast, I need all the help and
> inspiration I can get...
>
> Mike M.
>
> Dicky wrote:
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Laurie Solomon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 9:35 PM
>> Subject: RE: filmscanners: OT more copyright questions
>>
>> Yet another idiot. this is a SCANNING group. If you must discuss coptright
>> then go soewhere else to do it you numbskull.
>>
>> Richard Corbett
>
One of the nice things about this list is that the scope of scanning is
allowed to include monitors, memory, CPUs, imaging software, artists,
photographers, and film, but there have been days in the past few weeks
where the peripheral subjects donated over 140 messages a day to my in box,
and few if any dealt directly with scanning. Ed left at about that time, and
may have felt the same frustration at the volume of off-topic messages as I
did. It is not so much that off topic messages exist, as the volume of off
topic messages received in one day that frustrated me.
Jim Snyder