use rules for internet mailing lists & FILT4LIB

[Michael Iorns]

David, 

It is not just relating to the filtering topic. I have just looked 
at the archives of web4lib, by author. You should try it some time. 

You blame everyone else. To follow your argument, if you had quit posting
about filtering, then others would too. 

I apologise (to everyone else) for making this message a public one. 

Michael

At 14:54 3/07/97 -0700, Burt wrote:
>JQ Johnson wrote:
>
>>1/ What guidelines can librarians suggest to improve the quality (and
>>information content) of electronic discussions?
>>2/ for web4lib, would it be appropriate to have a similar max limit to
>the
>>one my faculty member imposes, perhaps phrased as a guideline rather
>than a
>>hard limit?
>
>No inflammatory innuendo intended here about your motivations, but I
>think the effect of such a limit would be to silence the pro-filtering
>side of the debate.  There have been more anti-filtering than
>pro-filtering posts here, for sure.  But most of the pro-filtering posts
>have come from just two people, Ronnie Morgan and myself.  Shut the two
>of us off because of "max. limits" and you effectively end the debate.
>This would cause listservs to mimic professional conferences and
>literature, where the pro-filtering view has been for the most part
>effectively silenced.  Is that what you want?
>
>Others (and I'm not implying you) have suggested that this debate is
>largely an extension of me.  It takes two, and in this case , a bunch of
>people, to tango.  Had the anti-filterers quit posting about filtering,
>I would have to, a long time ago.
>
>I have a more appropriate suggestion: Let's move the bulk of the
>discussions about filtering back over to FILT4LIB.
>


>C'mon, let's go.  Who's with me?


You are. 




*


               Michael Iorns|Private Bag 3105|iorns at waikato.ac.nz 
        Computing Consultant|    Hamilton    |Ph(64)7 838-4466x6737 
  Waikato University Library|  New Zealand   |Fx  " " 838-4017