here here
At 12:35 PM 12/01/01 -0500, you wrote:
>I bet I can find at least 100 frickin' messages a week whining about
>slightly OT postings. This biweekly cycle of:
>
>1. Good postings, littered with a few topics that I am not so interested
>in, followed by
>2. One or two OT posts that really seem to get SOMEONE's panties in a
>bunch, followed by
>3. A good week of one or more threads whining, bitching and people being
>babies about said OT Posts, followed by
>4. The list admin getting involved, coinciding with an occasional post like
>this one, followed by
>5. The list "shutting down" creatively because now everyone is hesistant to
>post anything but dead-on topics
>
>is totally frickin' OLD, people. But perhaps that is the "biorhythm" of a
>moderately active list. I don't know.
>
>Get a decent email client, filter and DON'T READ the OT posts, and deal with
>it. Or go start your own list. Some of us list veterans are getting tired
>of this crap.
>
>M
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Billy Cravens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 11:04 AM
>To: Fusebox
>Subject: Re: OT: (was RE: arguments **against** fusebox)
>
>
>Alan,
>
>I really do agree with you. However, as a busy professional, I really
>don't have time to sift through 50-100 emails per day. So I do what I
>can. It's a waste of everyone's time to read "Yes I agree" as a reply
>or blatant personal opinion as a totally OT response to an OT thread.
>Just my $0.02.
>
>--
>Billy Cravens
>HR Web Development, Sabre
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>"McCollough, Alan" wrote:
> >
> > okay now y'all get two cents worth...
> >
> > Over the last couple of weeks, this list has been BORING! Too many folks
> > took the "No OT:" thing to heart; or they took it too literally.
> >
> > I'll say that you can divide the partcicipants (I don't care about the
> > lurkers or leeches) of this list into two categories:
> >
> > A.) Folks who want this list to resemble a library. Shhhhhh! Be quiet!
> > People are trying to study!
> >
> > or....
> >
> > B.) Folks who want the list to appear like a mix between a mosh pit and
>the
> > floor of the New York Stock Exchange!
> >
> > Me, I'm definately for option B ! Even though plenty of topics veer off
> > course, the energy generated keeps folks thinking creatively. Sure some of
> > the topics are wacky, some are way OT, some are merely tech questions that
> > could be asked on any CF forum, and some are, well, obscene. I'm for
> > deleting the obscene ones, but anything else goes! Ya gotta embrace the
> > chaos, baby!
> >
> > Alan McCollough
> > Web Programmer
> > Allaire Certified ColdFusion Developer
> > Alaska Native Medical Center
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Billy Cravens [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 7:47 AM
> > > To: Fusebox
> > > Subject: Re: OT: (was RE: arguments **against** fusebox)
> > >
> > > I think his complaints were about the endless ranting about the CFDJ,
> > > journalism ethics, and conflicts of interest. Definitely cf-community
> > > would be a better source for this thread.
> > >
> > > Not that this is different from any other list I've ever been on: I've
> > > found most people don't stop and think "Is this REALLY within the scope
> > > of this list?" before they hit the reply key on something they disagree
> > > (or even agree) with.
> > >
> > > -Billy
> > > {redacted}
> >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
