[Taxacom] Put a limit on number of submissions? Maybe, maybe not

[John Grehan]

But when it is enough is a personal decision. There is no objective
criterion. And just because a discussion may go on and on does not mean
that other things will be bypassed. They may only be 'bypassed' if no
one bothers to discuss them.

One may 'know' where others are coming from and have had enough
discussion to suit their own purposes, but that personal threshold need
not be the threshold boundary for others.

I think the most important quality of the list was, however, identified
by Robin - that there is an exchange of views. One need not identify
agreement or not as the measure of value for any discussion in science.

Of course, this is a decidedly personal opinion.

John Grehan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robin Leech [mailto:releech at telus.net]
> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 12:18 PM
> To: John Grehan; Taxacom
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Put a limit on number of submissions?
Maybe,maybe
> not
> 
> You have it wrong, John. It is not that I agree or disagree with you,
> it is that there is so much on the same issue that other things seem
to
> be bypassed.  It is kinda like, "OK, nuff said on the issue."
> But, it doesn't go away.  It is there week after week.
> Perhaps a chatroom for an issue, once it has had more than say 50
> respondants, is in order.  The active participants are not changing
> their view.  They are exchanging them, but when I have heard yours,
say,
> for the 4th or 5th time, I know where you are coming from, and same
> with the others.  It is overkill.
> Robin
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Grehan" <jgrehan at sciencebuff.org>
> To: "Taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 9:00 AM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Put a limit on number of submissions?
Maybe,maybe
> not
> 
> 
> >I agree with John Landolt's perspective although I would not respond
> > just to the discussants off list as that defeats the purpose of the
> > list. I am always amazed by the propensity of some people to want a
list
> > that either caters to their view on what should or should not be
> > discussed, or on how much should be discussed. I suggest they set up
> > their own lists and dictate accordingly. I have seen that done by
some
> > quite successfully. If you want to be censored according to someone
> > else's personal preferences, or have the opportunity to censor the
topic
> > or amount of discussion then I say go for it.
> >
> > John Grehan
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> >> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of John Landolt
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 10:54 AM
> >> To: Robin Leech
> >> Cc: Taxacom
> >> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Put a limit on number of submissions?
> > Maybe,maybe
> >> not
> >>
> >> Dear Robin and other Taxacomers:
> >>
> >> As a listserv "lurker" (I haven't posted anything for quite a
while)
> >> I do find the frequent small group "discussions" and dialogs lead
to
> >> occasional delete key "cramping" but I also find some of the
> >> exchanges can be edifying (and some days Taxacom traffic is all I
get
> >> in my inbox!).
> >>
> >> I wonder if the problem lies in the ease with which one can click
the
> >> "reply to all" button compared to typing or copying just the
address
> >> (s) of the one or two people sharing one's "deep" interest in a
> >> particular topic.
> >>
> >> On balance, I'm willing to risk loss of edification through my too
> >> quick use of  the "delete" button rather than imposing an arbitrary
> >> limit to postings. I do hope that this discussion gets everyone
more
> >> sensitive to a need to use the "reply to all" more judiciously.  My
> >> (less than) two cents.
> >>
> >> Cheers to everyone.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >> John Landolt, Ph. D.
> >> Research Professor of Biology, Emeritus
> >> Graduate Faculty
> >> Shepherd University
> >> Shepherdstown, WV
> >> http://shyretiring.blogspot.com/
> >>
> >> On Sep 17, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Robin Leech wrote:
> >>
> >> > For my two-bits worth, when I see 15 or more TAXACOM messages
> >> > in my in box, and most are from 3 to 5 members, I no longer even
> >> > bother to read them.  I simply delete.
> >> > Why don't these wordy guys write a book with all their rantings
in
> > it,
> >> > then try to sell it?
> >> > Robin
> >> >
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >>
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >>
> >> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either
of
> >> these methods:
> >>
> >> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
> >> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
> >> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >
> > The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either
of
> > these methods:
> >
> > (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Or (2) a Google search specified as:
> > site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here