>> would it be reasonable to set a limit on how >> many >> posts a subscriber can send in a given 24-hour period -
> It would certainly not be reasonable. Some FWers put a lot > of work into scanning material from a variety of sources > which might be of interest to FWers and sometimes there's > enough for more than three messages to be sent in a day. Yes indeed. Truer words were never spoke. Indeed, I cannot say clearly enough how much I appreciate and benefit from the sharing and conversation on FW - which means, of course, how grateful I am for the commitment and work of a number of fellow FW-ers. > This is a good example of rights, which should vary > depending on the efforts of those FWers who put a lot of > thought and time into their contributions and those who > write very rarely indeed. > > There is such a thing as a delete key. Gosh, the ability to delete is not the problem. It's the volume of high-quality material that raises the obstacles. I can dump the junk as easily as the next guy. I'm not sure that rights enter into it, unless you mean that everybody has a right to put as much into the conversation as they wish (and, correlatively, get as much out of it). My reasoning was this: these contributions are *valuable*; they display the effort and time that goes into them; I find severe temporal obstacles to giving them the attention they warrant and require; might we choose to volunteer to slow the conservation down a bit, reduce the daily volume? If this is just a bad idea, if doing so would detract from the value of the list, then I wouldn't want to pursue it any further. Stephen Straker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vancouver, B.C. [Outgoing mail scanned by Norton AntiVirus] _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
