Rich Kulawiec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 1999 at 06:18:26PM -0800, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
>
> I can only report to what I've observed, and what I have observed
> is that on the lists I run, and on those which I participate, many
> users have terrible problems with all of these tasks -- tasks which I
> consider rudimentary and mostly obvious.
I have long ago given up my anger that some of my writers are more
interested in the forum than the function, and it no longer irritates me
unduly that someone doesn't operate with basic data. I don't like
cleaning up the HTML the new mailers will include with straight ASCII,
but I'm less a Captain Queeg taskmaster measuring sand out of a tureen
than one who wants to read what the writer has to say. I have found
that by coming down harshly on those who are new or unsophisticated on
wires, I discourage some who have great stories to tell. Probably if
your focus is chatting about movies or macrame, participation is not
such a delicate membrane. I try to encourage new writers who are in awe
sometimes of some professionals and other adepts on the list, and I find
they can be very shy and reluctant generally. That's why I will go over
the hundreds of lines of a report of a conversation which ran last night
on cannibalism in Nigeria, removing by hand all the hundreds of stray
mismatched characters, and say nothing to the writer.
It's a measure of forum over function. Some with huge multiple lists
tend of necessity to the technical strain, others have maybe a single
operation with content they care deeply about. No way's absolutely
correct for all purposes.
I parse this here list for tips which won't jostle too severely
my concern as stated .
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Bowden)
Proud member of NERDNOSH (tm)!
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] org
the command: subscribe nerdnosh
