Fabian's take on it;Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Fabian Fang wrote: > On Feb 23, 2010, at 11:25 AM, Len Gerstel wrote: > >> The lemlists list is an underused list, but it allows a little more >> freewheeling discussions regarding the other LEM lists. > > Len also wrote in another thread: > >> The chastisement was

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

Previously, at 2:25 pm -0500 2/23/10, Len Gerstel wrote: >The lemlists list is an underused list, but it allows a little more >freewheeling discussions regarding the other LEM lists. > > >Len Gerstel >lgers...@gmail.com >List Nanny G3-5 list How do we access it? P. -- I thoroughly disapprove

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Feb 23, 2010, at 11:25 AM, Len Gerstel wrote: The lemlists list is an underused list, but it allows a little more freewheeling discussions regarding the other LEM lists. Len also wrote in another thread: The chastisement was to take a discussion to the LEMlists list, which was specifica

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Len Gerstel wrote: > OK, here is some Nanny input. > > CIVIL discussion is fine. > > As long as no flame wars erupt and everyone keeps civil, we tend to allow > these threads. The Nannies are all volunteers and have to allocate our time > that we spend on helping o

DELETE if UNINTERESTED Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Dan wrote: > At 8:51 AM + 2/23/2010, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: >> >> End this one you mean.? BEFORE we find out what the Mom and Nannies >> want in terms of WHERE to discuss list business ? >> Before a legitimate question is fully answered? > > Are you un

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On 2/23/10 9:38 AM, John Musbach wrote: On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Dan wrote: Ok. Well. I guess that's the glove on the floor. Nannies, you gonna put a nail in this thread or would you care to step in and prove me wrong? It's actually interesting, it's as if the nannies are afraid to

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

OK, here is some Nanny input. CIVIL discussion is fine. As long as no flame wars erupt and everyone keeps civil, we tend to allow these threads. The Nannies are all volunteers and have to allocate our time that we spend on helping out on the lists. Yes, Dan Knight is the list owner and his

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Dan wrote: > Ok.  Well.  I guess that's the glove on the floor.  Nannies, you gonna put a > nail in this thread or would you care to step in and prove me wrong? It's actually interesting, it's as if the nannies are afraid to respond one way or another on this issu

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

In a message dated 2/23/10 8:17:07 AM, dantear...@gmail.com writes: > At 8:51 AM + 2/23/2010, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: > >End this one you mean.? BEFORE we find out what the Mom and Nannies > >want in terms of WHERE to discuss list business ? > >Before a legitimate question is fully a

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

At 8:51 AM + 2/23/2010, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: End this one you mean.? BEFORE we find out what the Mom and Nannies want in terms of WHERE to discuss list business ? Before a legitimate question is fully answered? Are you under the impression that these lists are fully public and c

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Dan wrote: > At 5:58 AM + 2/23/2010, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: >> >> What does that have to do with the topic of morphing/thread >> highjacking ? I did not read the webcam threads as I was not >> interested in the subject line. > > 1.  The original thread

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

At 5:58 AM + 2/23/2010, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: What does that have to do with the topic of morphing/thread highjacking ? I did not read the webcam threads as I was not interested in the subject line. 1. The original thread's topic, webcam issues, was on-topic to g3-5. 2. The ori

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

cam's so that would not be OT. > What does that have to do with the topic of morphing/thread highjacking ? I did not read the webcam threads as I was not interested in the subject line. the subject line here is "Need for list message morphing rule" > When in doubt on a post cont

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On 2/22/10 2:42 PM, "Wallace Adrian D'Alessio" wrote: > Kyle, > > How about addressing whether list rules and other issues directly > related to a specific list are legitimate subjects to discuss. > > And if LEMlists group list is the "only" place to legitimately discuss > such list business wh

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Kyle Hansen wrote: > On 2/22/10 11:51 AM, "Wallace Adrian D'Alessio" > wrote: > > And why the moderators don't press joining the LEMlists group is a mystery. > > > > > The moderators have a ton of issues to deal with.  A message can turn into a > different theme a

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Jonas Lopez wrote: > For what it is worth, I know nothing of any sort of LEMLIST and hope not to > need to. Well then, it'd be wise to read and understand http://lowendmac.com/lists/lemlists.html so that you don't make the same mistake Jonas did. -- Best Regar

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

> >> Point taken John. But I could swear each list had a set of rules that > >> allowed rule discussion as legit content of discussion. and you would be exactly correct! > > Rule discussion is rarely legit and usually ignored. and you would also be exactly correct! > > I cannot agree with eit

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On 2/22/10 11:51 AM, "Wallace Adrian D'Alessio" wrote: > And why the moderators don't press joining the LEMlists group is a mystery. > > > > The moderators have a ton of issues to deal with. A message can turn into a different theme as can a conversation. We let it go until it becomes compl

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Dan wrote: > At 7:51 PM + 2/22/2010, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: >> >> Point taken John. But I could swear each list had a set of rules that >> allowed rule discussion as legit content of discussion. > > Rule discussion is rarely legit and usually ignored.

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

At 7:51 PM + 2/22/2010, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: Point taken John. But I could swear each list had a set of rules that allowed rule discussion as legit content of discussion. Rule discussion is rarely legit and usually ignored. The LEMlists list is basically a blackhole. *shrug* -

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 7:03 PM, John Musbach wrote: > > > You are incorrect, please refer to lowendmac.com/lists/lemlists.html. > ___ If I may further make comment here without further ticking anyone off, it is interesting that the LEMlists gro

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 7:03 PM, John Musbach wrote: > On 2/22/10, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 5:06 AM, John Musbach >wrote: > > > >> On 2/21/10, Jonas Lopez wrote: > >> > Need for list message morphing rule > >&

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On 2/22/10, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 5:06 AM, John Musbach wrote: > >> On 2/21/10, Jonas Lopez wrote: >> > Need for list message morphing rule >> > >> > Since I am the author of a post that has now morphed into an enti

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On 2/22/10, Jonas Lopez wrote: > --- On Mon, 2/22/10, Dan wrote: >> From: Dan >> Subject: Re: Need for list message morphing rule >> To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com >> Date: Monday, February 22, 2010, 9:32 AM >> At 12:06 AM -0500 2/22/2010, John Musbach wrote: &

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 5:06 AM, John Musbach wrote: > On 2/21/10, Jonas Lopez wrote: > > Need for list message morphing rule > > > > Since I am the author of a post that has now morphed into an entirely > > inappropriate commentary on how to kill a hd, and

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

--- On Mon, 2/22/10, Dan wrote: > From: Dan > Subject: Re: Need for list message morphing rule > To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com > Date: Monday, February 22, 2010, 9:32 AM > At 12:06 AM -0500 2/22/2010, John Musbach wrote: > >On 2/21/10, Jonas Lopez wrote: > >> 

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

At 12:06 AM -0500 2/22/2010, John Musbach wrote: On 2/21/10, Jonas Lopez wrote: Need for list message morphing rule Since I am the author of a post that has now morphed into an entirely inappropriate commentary on how to kill a hd, and since this list is always monitored and those

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

At 3:19 PM -0800 2/21/2010, Jonas Lopez wrote: Need for list message morphing rule Since I am the author of a post that has now morphed into an entirely inappropriate commentary on how to kill a hd, Threads drift - just like most communications between human beings. Get over it. We gave

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Jonas Lopez wrote: > Need for list message morphing rule > > Since I am the author of a post that has now morphed into an entirely > inappropriate commentary on how to kill a hd, and since this list is always > monitored and those Niamey

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Chance Reecher wrote: > This is, and should remain an unmoderated list. It keeps the playing field > level. > > If you don't like it, take your questions/comments elsewhere. Don't whine > and complain. > > ___ > I guess you don't know SQUA

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

Previously, at 11:50 pm -0500 2/21/10, Chance Reecher wrote: >I understand that we have nannies overseeing the group. >What I mean by unmoderated is that when someone posts, their post doesn't have >to be approved, as is the case on the Swaplist. >The OP is suggesting that this list be moderated,

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

On 2/21/10, Jonas Lopez wrote: > Need for list message morphing rule > > Since I am the author of a post that has now morphed into an entirely > inappropriate commentary on how to kill a hd, and since this list is always > monitored and those Niamey's should refuse to publish

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

I understand that we have nannies overseeing the group. What I mean by unmoderated is that when someone posts, their post doesn't have to be approved, as is the case on the Swaplist. The OP is suggesting that this list be moderated, so their threads don't get off-topic. On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 11:

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

Previously, at 11:09 pm -0500 2/21/10, Chance Reecher wrote: >This is, and should remain an unmoderated list. It keeps the playing field >level. > >If you don't like it, take your questions/comments elsewhere. Don't whine and >complain. > I beg your pardon: >From

Re: Need for list message morphing rule

This is, and should remain an unmoderated list. It keeps the playing field level. If you don't like it, take your questions/comments elsewhere. Don't whine and complain. On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Jonas Lopez wrote: > Need for list message morphing rule > > Since I

Need for list message morphing rule

Need for list message morphing rule Since I am the author of a post that has now morphed into an entirely inappropriate commentary on how to kill a hd, and since this list is always monitored and those Niamey's should refuse to publish such morphed replies, I ask the question in keeping