Temperamental public, please??

[Dennis Johnson]

On Thu, 29 May 1997 A440A@aol.com wrote:
> =20
>       IMHO,  we are not doing without technical postings because one pers=
on
> complains of volume.  We are doing without because a number of valuable
> people have found the signal to noise ratio here to be so poor as to rend=
er
> the value of the list less than the time required to use it.  They have
> simply stopped reading or posting. =20
>        It  is the off-technical-topics that have cost this list the major=
ity
> of its loss.   There are several posters that have their postings  delete=
d,
> unopened,  from some of our mailboxes, simply because such a huge percent=
age
> of their postings have been of personal, or non-technical nature. =20
>      We should all remember that  we establish credibilty through our
> contributions. ..................etc.    =20

> Ed Foote
> Precision Piano Works
> Nashville, Tn. =20
>  =20
____________________________>=20

Well said Ed.  I want to endorse this publicly just because I think there=
=20
was some displaced flaming going on here.  I do not believe that Mr.=20
Sadler intended to imply in any way that a technical contribution of Jim=20
Coleman=D5s, or anyone else=D5s,  should be restrained just because they ha=
d=20
already posted something recently.  The issue is as Ed put it. Generally=20
though, I have seen that the problem of private, non-technical postings=20
to the public list is slowly getting better not worse- and I attribute this=
 to=20
people gradually getting more familiar with the media and feeling less=20
compelled to ramble as freely as they would in direct conversation. Please
consider each posting you make to be something which will be preserved in=
=20
the archives and representational of your contribution to this profession.
Just as you consider that your reputation rests on each job that=20
you do, so does your credibility rest among your colleagues with each=20
contribution you make to our technical discussion. If that realization=20
somewhat reduces volume, fine. If it reduces valuable information or=20
content, then someone has seriously misunderstood what we are all about.


Have a good weekend, I=D5ll be cruising with power on two wheels.


Dennis Johnson
St. Olaf College