In a message dated 10/7/2002 5:11:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hmm. I see the point, but I believe that sometimes it's permissible to > break the rules. It doesn't happen very often, and when it does it's > usually for a good reason (in the mind of the sender, at least), and > it's almost always preceded by something like the first few lines of > Claudia's recent post: > Whether or not the reason is deemed a good one is entirely subjective. The purpose of the NJC tag is to remove those folks who don't want to discuss non-Joni related matters. Period. That is why the NJC system is in place and that is why it works. I'm not saying that Claudia's cause of promoting peace isn't a worthy one--of course it is (IMHO). But discussions that are non-Joni-related, no matter what the sender's feelings about the matter, need to be tagged as such because that is the way the list has been set up and those are the guidelines that we agreed to upon membership here. It is not incumbent upon the Joni-onlies to then delete mail that was neither requested nor expected based upon the membership rules and guidelines. I'm sure that when the rules are broken, the sender does have the best of intentions in doing so. But Joni-onlies have made a decision about what they want this service to be in their lives, and this only works if we all remember the membership guidelines. It's a win-win situation if we play by the rules--you can discuss any issues you want, tag them NJC, and the Joni-onlies can take no part in that! Thanks for hearing me out! Ken
