Could someone make the list do the [cctalk] thing in the subject line?

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2015-11-17 21:32, Fred Cisin wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Al Kossow wrote:
>> Yes, they were two separate lists at one point, then someone decided
>> to start forwarding messages between the two, and other people started
>> posting replies to the wrong list. All of the replies to the post
>> about the collection being given away was from cctalk, but the actual
>> message was posted on cctech. You can't effectively filter out the
>> crap from the other list because the headers being sent through aren't
>> always right. I lost the original collection msg because my filter
>> thought it had been sent from cctalk and forwarded to cctech.
>> There was a discussion about getting rid of one or the other list.
>> I wish someone would just DO IT.
>
> If I recall correctly (unrefreshed dynamic wetware RAM), it was not two
> separate lists.  CCTECH was a subset of CCTALK.  CCTECH was to be
> ON-topic ONLY, with CCTALK quite a bit looser, to be able to devolve
> into determining location from ham radio callsigns, etc.  Everything
> posted to CCTECH was echoed on CCTALK.  A participant needed only to
> subscribe to one list, depending on how tolerant they wanted to be about
> off-topic tangents.
>
> Then there was a horrible crash.  It was neither Y2K, nor winter
> solctice 2012, but the entire universe came to an end, and there was NO
> list traffic at all!  Heroic efforts were made, and the list[s] were
> brought back to life!
>
> But nobody could manage to successfully replicate the previous
> configuration, and all the king's horsemen and all the king's men could
> not put it back together again.  Posts to CCTECH did get forwarded to
> CCTALK, and posts to CCTALK that were deemed to be ON-topic did get
> forwarded to CCTECH, and those foolish enough to be subscribed to both
> lists did get two copies.  But, then the posts to CCTALK that were
> deemed worthy to be copied by CCTECH also got automagically forwarded
> back to CCTALK.  When people posted to both lists, or replied to a post
> to both lists, or didn't pay attention to what they were doing, there
> were duplicates, and duplicates of duplicates, and sometimes duplicates
> of duplicates of duplicates.
>
> The list management have strived valiantly to repair the system, and
> have gotten pretty close, but it may never be quite as it was in the
> good ol' days..

Quite honestly, if you ask me, it didn't work in the good old days either.

	Johnny