I suppose at this point I should point out that it was I that subscribed
mail-archive.com's bot to the list. Not sure when, but looking at the
archive, it seems to be roughly end of September 2000. (See
http://www.mail-archive.com/london-list%40happyfunball.pm.org/mail5.html .)
Since I confirmed the subscription from my work address rather than as
'archive@jab.org', it went past Jonathan Stowe. He wasn't exactly
enthusiastic about it, but still approved the subscription.
alex wrote:
> it's also about atmosphere. i don't like contributing to a friendly,
> discussive list that's archived and searchable by anyone who
> happens to drop by. mutual trust is a valuable thing.
This is one of the main points he made -- that (some|many|most) people
wouldn't post so freely to a discussion list if they knew their words would
be archived for posterity.
I thought it would be a convenient thing to have around. I apologise if I
hurt anybody in doing this. I'll offer to unsubscribe the archiver bot from
the list if that's the consensus (though I'm sure others could do so as
easily -- it would be more of a token or symbolic thing for me to do it).
Flames to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
