On Sat, 16 Mar 1996 13:36:27 -0500 Philo <[log in to unmask]> said:
 
>Your reply that even though a  large number of listowners wanted it, and
>I only  remember seeing two  that didn't (which  could be solved  with a
>switch),
 
First off, we need to keep things in proportion here. A *small* number of
list owners  (say a  dozen or so)  said they wanted  it. An  even smaller
number said  they did not  want it. Thousands  of other list  owners said
nothing. From this I  concluded that this would be a  good feature to add
as time permits. However,  this is not the only feature  that it would be
good to add as time permits. Everything has to be prioritized.
 
>you told us that you had better things to do with your programming time,
>and we should just deal with it.
 
No,  I said  our programming  time was  currently spent  on items  with a
higher priority.  This doesn't mean it  will never get done,  but it does
mean it is not going to get done right now.
 
  Eric