FHammett-
Basically, I agree, but if there were good, topical threads running, the
personal stuff would either go away, or at least be much easier to ignore
in favor of other content.
But lacking the good topical threads, you can't blame a bunch of racing
buddies for lying to each other until there's something important to say!
And you never know when one of their yarns will become a good topical
thread... happened that way with brats, after all!
I think, if you want more content, some of the silent partners to this
thing, of whom, I believe, there are many, should speak up with some new
ideas...
-Alfred
At 10:49 PM 12/9/97 EST, you wrote:
>As a new subscriber (only two months) I may be out of place in this
>correspondence. I will probably be spamed for this commentary. But one
>reason this newsgroup tends to be boring is because some of which is here
>should be addressed not to the group, but to the individuals to whom it
>applies. Does everyone who races vintage cars really care about "the slow
>ass red car" ( two or three people who diced together at one race?") The
>thread will probably go on for a month or two.
>
>Conversations like this should take place in private Email. That is why we
>can CC (carbon copy )other interested parties. My email allows me to respond
>to the individual who made the correspondence without sending my presonal
>comment to the entire group. To the extent that this newsgroup becomes a
>means of private correspondence it will have less appeal for those who are
not
>privy (or do not care) about the personal matters effecting only a few.
>
>Those who question why the same old names keep appearing on this newsletter
>now have an answer. It is because much of what appears only effects those
>"same old names".
>
>The threads that have common interest are a value to many of us. And it
helps
>if the Subject Column clearly describes the subject matter. But it is a
waste
>of time to access every piece of correspondence to find much of them are
>nothing more that personal correspondence between two or three people. Maybe
>This type of correspondence should be sent by email, to the person to who it
>is addressed.
>
>I hope I dont offend anyone. But if so, Im sure Ill hear about it. Does
>anyone agree?
>
>
>
>
>
>
|