> I do not know Eric Thomas, but I consider
> him a serious and talented artist, and I very much appreciate his continuing
> presence and participation on LstOwn-L.
 
So do I.  I've enjoyed arguing with Eric on this list in the past on topics
like bitnet vs internet, and I considered jumping into the religious war the
other day when he was putting down my favorite OS (unix).  It's fun to debate
with Eric because of his candor (polite word choice there :-) and because I
find it somehow funny to think of an English professor with absolutely no
technical background of any kind arguing with the best-known computer genius
in NetLand.  I want to make it clear, however, that at no point have I ever
had anything but the highest respect for Eric's skills and, in one sense even
more important for us, the enormous amount of time and energy he has devoted
to giving freely to us all.  He gives us his products, he gives us answers,
and he gives us funny (or at least I find most of them funny) harangues.
 
> (a) most basic questions posted to LstOwn-L get answered fairly quickly and
> well and don't seem to be resented by anyone on this list (in fact, we seem
> to collectively be a pretty friendly lot, anxious to be helpful to one
> another),
 
This is true.  I have never been made to feel unwelcome or stupid even when
asking very stupid questions.  Ironically, I think I've asked "dumber"
questions in recent months than I did when I first became a listowner a
couple of years ago.  Part of that may be because at first I was intimidated
at the thought of speaking up on a list like this one.  I knew that I was
almost certainly the least knowledgeable listowner in existence and was
afraid that my questions would annoy the other subscribers.  I read the
list logs for the previous three months and read as many of the listserv
documents as I could find before I ever asked anything on the list.  I fear
I've become a bit lazier now.  I've forgotten some of what I read in the
documents two years ago, and I tend to come straight to the list with dumb
questions before really thinking the question through.
 
> and (c) creation of a 'junior LstOwn-L' list might dilute the resource we
> already have by denying the 'junior LstOwn-L' subscribers of the experience
> represented by longer-term LstOwn-L subscribers *and* by denying those
 
I hope that this list is not separated into "junior" and "senior."  Although
presumably we could lurk on the other division of the list, most of us would
probably spend most of our time in our "proper" division -- since that,
after all, would be the point of the separation.  One danger of that would
be that we juniors, the blind leading the blind, might spread misinformation.
And we would have a hard time in some cases deciding the appropriate place
for "intermediate" questions.  I'm not at all sure where the line should be
drawn between juniors and seniors.  I do know that I'm a "junior."  I know
nothing whatsoever about programming (except for having read the first
chapter in a book called -Teach Yourself C-, something I hope to get back
to when I win Publishers Clearinghouse Sweepstakes and can quit teaching
English), I know nothing about VM systems except that my few times to have
to use them (when traveling or when wandering into public parts of them
offering telnet-accessible resources) have been my idea of hell, I haven't
a clue about what is really happening in all those lines and satellites that
spew data packets around the world.  Yet I answer net questions almost every
day, locally, nationally, and even internationally.  (I enjoy telling the
gurus in our Computing Center about my "international reputation" -- and
asking them the answers to the questions I'm being asked if I don't know.)
I'm able to act as "non-techy guru" because of surface-level knowledge I've
picked up by hanging around lists with the techies.
 
>      It seems to me one list for all ListServ list owners should be able to
> suffice -- especially if the service offered by the existing list is
 
Yes.
 
>                    Your LstOwn-L list coordinator,
>                             John B Harlan
 
And thank you, John, for this list.
   --Natalie ([log in to unmask])