On Fri, 17 May 2002, Doc wrote: Hear Hear! Thanks Jay, for running and upgrading the list! Peter Wallace

On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 01:15:37PM -0500, Jay West wrote: that's what List-Id: is for.. List-Id: Classic Computer Discussion - Unmoderated <cctalk.classiccmp.org> doesn't it have different List-Id:? regards, -- -- Lubomir Sedlacik &lt;salo(a)Xtrmntr.org&gt; ASCII Ribbon campaign against /"\ -- -- &lt;salo(a)silcnet.org&gt; e-mail in gratuitous HTML and \ / -- -- Microsoft proprietary formats X -- -- PGPkey: http://Xtrmntr.org/salo.pgp / \ -- -- Key Fingerprint: DBEC 8BEC 9A90 ECEC 0FEF 716E 59CE B70B 7E3B 70E2 --

Sellam wrote.... I'm sorry Sellam (and to others who have sent me email recently)... I'm barraged by a huge volume of email at the moment, primarily due to the list change and some problems that people seem to be having. As a result, I have barely been able to reply to anything other than the most critical messages. My apologies people - if anyone sent me an email that I haven't responded to recently, please wait a few days, and then send it again. That would greatly help my sanity right now! Here's how it is currently handled. In the scenario that Sellam puts forth, no - the reply from someone on cctalk to a post that originated on cctech will NOT go back to cctech. You can't have it both ways people - either the people on cctech see posts on cctalk or they don't. The people who have joined cctech did so specifically because they DIDN'T want to see posts on cctalk. As a result, I'm sure not going to force them to see posts on cctalk. (more below) from Yes, it will work, but the responsibility is the choice of the list member, not mine. If one wants to see posts on both, they should join both lists. However, keep in mind that most people won't want to join both, they will only want one or the other. In the end, it's the users choice. Jay West

At 12:20 AM 5/18/2002 +0100, Tony wrote: If you are on cctech presumably you don't want to subscribe to cctalk. The only reason to subscribe to them both is if you want to be able to post to cctech. That's right, that's inherent in the choice to be on cctech. No, it will be sent to cctalk also. GZ

At 01:33 AM 5/18/2002 +0100, you wrote: I don't know. My point, which I realized was unclear, was that if you only want to see cctech stuff, you subscribe to cctech, otherwise you subscribe to cctalk. The only reason to subscribe to cctech if you are subscribed to cctalk is if you want to post on-topic stuff to cctech so that cctech-ers will see it. I am not subscribed to cctech so I couldn't say what happens. GZ

On Sat, 18 May 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote: If this has been suggested, I missed it. But it seems that a simple solution would be for messages originated in CCTECH to carry a `Reply-To: cctech(a)classiccmp.org&#39; line instead of the `cctalk' one that they presently do. This would put the reply back to the originating group and keep the originator in the dialogue loop, and following the current protocol the reply would then be forwarded to cctalk. - don

On Fri, 17 May 2002, Gordon Zaft wrote: Gordon's responses are all correct. The problem then is that CCTECH is effectively useless at eliminating off-topic messages for people who prefer that in the sense that an on-topic thread started on CCTALK as a result of a message posted to CCTECH will be missed by the people on CCTECH. Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org * Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *

A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text Size: 1321 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020518/55968966/at…

Sellam Ismail: Tend to agree. But I'll mention that before the choices were: Say and NoSay Now the choices are Say, SayOT, and NoSay, if you take TALK to be the OT list and the TECH list to be the on topic one. John A.

Jerome Fine replies: Sorry Jay, but if you think I can remember what I said even yesterday, let alone a few days ago, then you have a lot to look forward to when you get to be a senior. I have enough trouble remembering what the bugs are in the programs I am fixing. Plus with all the stuff around the house that my wife has decided that she wants done - and ME to do the work - washing the kitchen walls to remove the old wallpaper paste, painting the kitchens walls, realizing that the kitchen ceiling also needs washing before it is painted (after 15 years the ceiling needs a wash) and finally weeding the garden, I really need two of me or maybe one less wife. NO, one less wife will not do - after being married for 45 years, I refuse to take the time to get used to someone else and besides I doubt if someone else would want to get used to me. Sincerely yours, Jerome Fine -- If you attempted to send a reply and the original e-mail address has been discontinued due a high volume of junk e-mail, then the semi-permanent e-mail address can be obtained by replacing the four characters preceding the 'at' with the four digits of the current year.

On Fri, 17 May 2002, Jay West wrote: The problem is that many relevant (and on-topic) replies will be missed by those on CCTECH, thereby penalizing them for not wanting to see off-topic crap. I'd always envisioned that everyone would be subscribed to CCTECH, and then anyone who wanted to start an off-topic thread or continue a thread that has gone off-topic could move over to CCTALK to take it up there. THOSE folks could subscribe to both lists so that they could have a place to blab all they wanted. That's what I thought this whole upgrade was about. What's the point of CCTECH then? Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org * Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *

Quothe Tony Duell, from writings of Sat, May 18, 2002 at 08:23:47PM +0100: Indeed. One observation is that often, what seems like a minor off-topic remark, unintended to spawn a lengthy thread, can turn into a lengthy off-topic thread. One idea that may help those of us who get tempted to make off-topic remarks is to "wait and re-read before sending." That is, if a message seems to contain a hint of off-topic wording, save it, wait a while, and then re-consider re-sending it to the list. While it can be fun, and thought provoking, to engage in some off-topic discussion and debating, the biggest problem appears to be that there are only 24 hours in a day, and reading through off-topic discussions, or trying to weed through them to get to the on-topic bits, takes a great deal of time that many of us don't have to spare---and time that could be better spent on other activities. So, while there are the issues of freedom of speech, and sometimes very interesting debates, on one hand, there's the loss of time from one's life on the other hand. Of course, adding OT: to the subject for messages that drift off-topic can save a great deal of time for many people on the list, allowing one to quickly scan through messages and delete them once the off-topicness of a particular thread becomes too tedious. What seems to annoy many people, including myself, is that the concern that certain people on this list have, with regards to off-topic messages, is not a concern for wasted time, but the concern over "offensive" messages, and, as a result, these over-sensitive and politically correct people seek to censor what others say. While I'm all for freedom of speech, and against political correctness, I realize that religion and politics are sometimes best left out of discussions where they don't belong, as tempting as it can be at times for some to go OT and bring such things into a conversation - there's no point in causing a rift between people who, otherwise, have interests in common. Perhaps the aforementioned "wait then post" method could eliminate a sizeable portion of off-topic messages, while still allowing enough to get through on CCTALK to provide for the occasional interesting OT thread or message. I greatly appreciate what Jay is doing to try to correct the problems, and hope that everyone will be patient with him. He's done much to help us with our hobby, and perhaps we really need to judge this list more by it's merits, which are many, rather than continuing to complain about it. After all, this list, and many on it, is a great resource for sharing information that allows us to preserve and restore our vintage systems. Equally problematic and time wasting, as I see it, are the discussions that drift from one subject to another (even if on-topic for the list) with no change in the subject header. This results in discussions of multiple subjects with the same subject header, thus making it difficult to weed through large numbers of messages. Just my two cents worth. R.D.D. -- Copyright (C) 2001 R. D. Davis The difference between humans & other animals: All Rights Reserved an unnatural belief that we're above Nature & rdd(a)rddavis.org 410-744-4900 her other creatures, using dogma to justify such http://www.rddavis.org beliefs and to justify much human cruelty.

On Mon, 20 May 2002, Dan Wright wrote: Thank you. There's another alternative, too. Domains are cheap, and Mailman is free. Doc

On Mon, 20 May 2002, Wayne Smith wrote: A matter of severing a part to save the whole I'm afraid. Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org * Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *

On Mon, 20 May 2002, Dan Wright wrote: Jeez, Dan, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You're just going to have to put up with the noise on CCTALK because it's intended for such posts. If you don't want to read my whining, you should just move over to CCTECH where it's nice and quiet. Well, there's no more spam (for now at least). Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org * Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *