On Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:01:23 -0700 you said:
>>On Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:44:05 -0700 Dan Lester said:
>>>At 09:32 PM 1/20/97 EST, you wrote:
>
  <Snip that Dan is a member of SPAM-L too>
>
>I got bunches of spam today, too, and especially since I'd been out of town
>since friday afternoon until noon today.

   Do you enjoy getting spams on non-spam  lists?  I don't.  I am on 40+
lists myself.  5 spams/day  per list is 200 spams a  day.  I don't think
that is  either appropriate matter  for those  lists nor a  small burden
that I can just shrug off - do you?  Even worse when it is THIS list!

   The only saving grace is that most of the lists are semi-moderated.

>>>Finally, I wouldn't THINK of hassling Eric about how he runs his list.
>>>People on all my lists have also learned not to hassle me about it.  I
>>>listen.  Then I remind them of the rules and to chill.  Those who don't
>>>like it don't have to sub...and I'm always willing to help folks unsub if
>>>they need the help.
>>
>I'm not suggesting that people not complain, except that since I don't
>expect to change Eric's way he runs this list, I'm not going to waste time
>or bandwidth.

   You can't have it both ways.  Fine if you don't want to.  I guess you
rely on those of us who will speak up when needed.  I do very much, as I
said before, expect Eric to change the list if need be.  I do not expect
Eric to do it because I say so.   I expect that if he understands what I
have said, and  does not see a  down side that out-weighs  the upside of
the change, that he will do it.  As I would expect one of my subscribers
to expect of me when I run my lists.

   Knowing Eric, I expected the response  he sent.  Still, that does not
mean it  is the right thing  to do.  There  may be some solution  to the
problem that will accommodate all things that need to be considered.

   This has no personal bearing on Eric.  It's all about the list.

   What would YOU do if no one  speaks up and the list runneth over with
spam?  Run away and start another?   And so on forever?  Spam would make
this list pretty  useless now, wouldn't it?  We all  could use more time
for on-topic  things rather  than spam  or extra  list owner  work.  One
takes my, need I say "Our", time  the other his (or someone else who can
help him).

   And that, my friend, is a  BIG difference between telling someone HOW
to run their list and SUGGESTING something useful.

>>take the  starting attitude  of my responsibilities  being a  hassle.  I
>>wouldn't consider myself  to be a responsible list owner  if my attitude
>>was that I couldn't be bothered with making my list the best it can be.
>
>Exactly.  And that is exactly why I won't hassle Eric, or why I won't take
>too much telling me how to run my lists on them, either.  As we well know,
>there are many styles of listownership...and mine isn't the same as yours
>or Eric's, and that is fine.  I always figure someone who doesn't like how
>a given list can start his/her own and run it however the hell they want.
>As many of us know, that has happened before, and will happen again.  I
>don't expect to change your mind, so I'll quit talking about it here.

   The issue is NOT that as you  have stated.  Clearly, the issue is NOT
about style.  As  I have said above,  the answer is NOT to  run away and
dilute a good list that can be saved with a little change.

>>>In the kingdom of the blind the one-eyed man is king.
>>
>>   It depends, I would assume, if the eye were open.
>
>Well, I'll ignore the cheap shots at those who don't share your opinion of
>what is "right".

   It  wasn't a  cheap  shot at  someone who  doesn't  share my  "right"
opinion.  I  very much respect  peoples right  to disagree, and  you are
surely free to do so.  Also to make your case in public, as you have.

   The  difference is  beyond that.   When your  thinking goes  beyond a
point of  view to actually  causing, or helping  to cause, some  harm to
someone else, then that's where is moves from just a point of view.  The
quote seemed a good  place to make this point.  The harm  is, need it be
said, that caused by not saying anything  to Eric as the list is overrun
with spams.

> I'm convinced that arguing about "how lists should be
>run" is as fruitless as discussing Win vs Mac, Unix vs VM, Catholics vs
>Protestants, liberals vs conservatives, etc.  So I'll quit here....and ask
>all to remember that I'm not trying to tell ANYONE how to run a list.  If
>anyone cares, I can tell them what I do....but would never try to convince
>others why "my way is the best" or any such nonsense.

   What you are  saying is that you  DON'T want to say  anything and why
you feel that  way.  NOT saying something  can be just as  bad as saying
something.  By NOT saying something you  ARE saying a lot.  It's akin to
not trying to stop someone who will commit a crime when you know it will
be committed.  You are just as guilty because you aided the criminal.

   Before you  get all upset,  that's an analogy,  I am not  calling you
names or a criminal.  It's not personal.

   When you try to  change the issue to one of style,  as opposed to one
of  practical need,  then it  takes away  from the  real issue  at hand.
That's the problem.

** ------------------------------------------------------------------ **
**  Geert K. Marien : [log in to unmask]  (Bitnet: GKMQC@PUCC)  **
**        ListOwner: AIRLINE, RAILROAD, STAMPS, The INDIA List        **
**    (All contents are my own opinions - unless otherwise stated)    **
**         Watch EastEnders - The Soap Opera for REAL People!         **
** ------------------------------------------------------------------ **