On Wed, 19 Jun 1996 18:36:22 -0400 Craig A Summerhill said:
>On Wed, 19 Jun 1996, <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
>> >
>> > I just thought I'd let you know that I have never heard mention of your
>> > *LISTSERV* on the other list. Nor have I ever seen negative comments
>> > about any other software. So...no cheap shots are being taken at your
>> > software...they're just getting down to business.
>>
>> It's not my software.  It just happens to be the mailing list management
>> software that was chosen for my site.
>
>Well, that pretty much supports my conclusion that these anti-LISTPROC
>comments come from the universally ignorant, as well.  Thanks for
>reinforcing my point for me.
 
Oh... *please*... go back and find where I said anything "anti-LISTPROC".
*PLEASE*.  Then post your search results.
 
Oh... couldn't find anything?  Gee... what a surprise.
 
Now... where was that point of yours again?  Oh... there it is... your
hair is covering it.
 
>> We'd get down to business, too, if other folks didn't keep bringing
>> up other types of software on a list that's not appropriate to those
>> types of software.
>
>99.9% of those comments come from people who are new network users or
>who have been thrust into a position of supporting a product for their
>institution that they know nothing about.  They ask questions out of a
>genuine desire to learn more about the product(s) available to them.
>If there query is misdirected, just say so.  There is no point in
>getting nasty with them.
 
I'm not going to apologize for someone else being "nasty" in that situation.
I don't think they should be either.  But *that* has nothing to do with
*this*.  If they want comparisons, that's fine... but on a LISTSERV
discussion you're going to find things swayed to LISTSERV.  On a list
about Fords as opposed to GM cars, you're going to find things swayed
towards Fords.  A person who is genuinely trying to compare products should
be intelligent enough to take things with a grain of salt.
 
Btw... I don't think LISTSERV is "perfect" either.  (And, believe me,
Eric and Nathan will vouch for that.)  But I like it.  It does what we
need here.
 
>> >Just thought you ought to know.
>>
>> Now ask me if I care.
>
>That's pretty much what you're teaching them too.
 
What?  That I don't care about LISTPROC?  Tell me why I should care.  It
doesn't help me support my clients. And why should I care about LISTPROC
on a LISTSERV discussion list?  If I were interested in LISTPROC, I'd
be on a LISTPROC discussion list.