Francois Davel wrote:
>
> Lets have some action on the list
>
I think the problem is that the RREC and RROC now both have active
mailing lists, and almost everyone who comes here is a member of one or
the other, and many are members of both.
Certainly the RREC one is quite active. Mr. van Bloeppel has posted a
plea there for people to bear in mind that this one exists as well, and
is universal and free, whereas the RREC one is of course limited to
paid-up members. His plea fell on stony ground.
This means that there could well be situations where someone has an
urgent request and is writing about it on the RREC list, and someone has
the answer - but never sees the question, because they are only an RROC
member. Party B can't see the question, and even if he did, he can't
post the answer.
An ideal situation would be if the three listgods - of the RROC, RREC
and this list - were to get together and create some method of mutual
access between the lists. None has so much volume that a combined list
would be so busy as to be unwieldy and thus difficult to read.
Is this workable? I feel it would be to the benefit of all RR owners,
and I'm sure it would increase the number of applicants to join the RROC
and RREC.
And that's before we even think about the RROC of Australia, the BDC,
etc.... As more and more RR&B-oriented organisations get on the web, we
are going to get increasing fragmentation. It's time to turn this trend
around!
Richard J. H. Shears
Spirit II '88
|