Re: Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon
Greetings Economists, Tom's comment is correct about attachments. However, that seems to me to point out another problem with email lists. Email is not designed to carry graphical content. Web pages are more efficient means of communicating collaborative graphical imagery. A portal based place for groups to share resources and archived forums, chats, lists etc. meets a lot of people's needs better. To my mind designing a left oriented environment that tries to build our sort of social relations is the direction that Ralph was trying to point at. We have a lot to work out with the web to build for the working class. The most important part it seems to me is collaborate work not just write notes back and forth. The depth is missing from individual efforts. A movie made for public consumption requires many hands, and so it is with a left web, many hands building something. Where the viruses create havoc it also stifles peoples efforts to express themselves. That isn't to say Tom's comment is right and how one ought to direct notes to this list, but I strongly advocate we build something more for the left. To focus more strongly upon the collaborative work that we can do. thanks, Doyle Saylor
Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon
Has anyone else seen and opened the 483k attachment to Ralph Johansen's post? I don't think such posts should be sent except after a preliminary post announcing that they are coming and that they are virus-free? Carrol
Re: Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon
Yes, I have asked before not to send big things like this. On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 03:15:47PM -0500, Carrol Cox wrote: Has anyone else seen and opened the 483k attachment to Ralph Johansen's post? I don't think such posts should be sent except after a preliminary post announcing that they are coming and that they are virus-free? Carrol -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Re: Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31260] Re: Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon It doesn't seem to have a virus, though. (I didn't save it. I just opened it. Norton didn't object. Nor did Kramden.) Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Michael Perelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 1:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:31260] Re: Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon Yes, I have asked before not to send big things like this. On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 03:15:47PM -0500, Carrol Cox wrote: Has anyone else seen and opened the 483k attachment to Ralph Johansen's post? I don't think such posts should be sent except after a preliminary post announcing that they are coming and that they are virus-free? Carrol -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RE: Re: Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31260] Re: Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon Criminentlies, cmrds, I am learning. I posted as original rather than as attachment because I have correspondents who tell me they don't open attachments or can't do so. But no more. I had no URL to send, because this was my rendering of a 25-year old Guindon cartoon. And I sent it as a memento of thejingoist holiday coming up, withoutsuspecting that it consumed 423k. Advice, please. Should I send things that are this long only following an invitation to request that they be sent separately? That's no fun. What other way? Anyhow, my apologies. I also installed Norton-Symantec several months ago, and now a device to let me know whether virus alerts are bogus. Alarums and night creatures abound in the hazardous world of the binary digit. I should maybe get out the way, or go find a twitlist. Incidentally, I've just read Nelson Peery's The Future is Up to Us, and I find it to be loaded with thoughtful material.It needs review and analysis, but maybe this has happened and I've missed it. I find only Lew Rosenbaum's reviewvia Google, which is not very analytical. Peery in part takes off from Marx's observation [without attribution, by the way] in the Grundrisse about the destruction of the value relation through robotization marking the crisis of legitimacy for capital. And Peery owes the reader a bibliography or footnotes, although I understand that this book comprises interviews and conversations. Ralph - Original Message - From: Devine, James To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 10:26 AM Subject: [PEN-L:31262] RE: Re: Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon It doesn't seem to have a virus, though. (I didn't save it. I just opened it. Norton didn't object. Nor did Kramden.) Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Michael Perelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 1:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:31260] Re: Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon Yes, I have asked before not to send big things like this. On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 03:15:47PM -0500, Carrol Cox wrote: Has anyone else seen and opened the 483k attachment to Ralph Johansen's post? I don't think such posts should be sent except after a preliminary post announcing that they are coming and that they are virus-free? Carrol -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon
Better: do not send attachments to a list. If you receive attachments do not open them. Only open attachments if you know who they are coming from and what they are. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
