Seymour: I tried to reply earlier and my IPAD kept mangling your name. I do not agree about your technical support stance on here. Just imagine if everyone that got stuff from the CBT tape and the xmit program and mfn** started with ther tech questions on here. IBM-MAIN would be a mess, probably 80 percent of the posts would be for those types of products. There would be essentially 20 percent left of IBM type posting. Then through in someone who likes to post long responses (no name here) no one would want to subscribe to IBM-main anymore.
I think its entirely reasonnable for each product to have its own group or possibly the CBTTAPE to have its own then Lionel's product and mfnet (or whatever its called) to group thier own products in groups. I think the CBTTAPE is a good example why it should keep its postings to a CBTTAPE group as there is a multivaried group and filexxx would be to small (IMO). If you want to know what is going on in a group (YAHOO ANYWAY) you set yourself up as nomail and the its up to you to go to YAHOO and see what the latest postings are. IBM-main is just broad enough to hand IBM MVS type emails and that is about enough. Of course if you don't mind the endless bickering of U** then it should have its own email list or Darren should step in and say NO MORE take it offline. The bickering over U** was worse than MFNET (or whatever its called). Frankly if I had email sent to home account I would have bit bucketed the people in question long ago and I would be not talking about MFnet (or whatever its called) as it would have been sent to my junk mail folder 2 years ago when it was originally broadcast. YAHOO does not allow me to do so without shutting off IBM-Main altogether. Yes it would be nice but I can't control YAHOO and I do not want to come back from a week off to find 2000 messages either. Ed Ed ________________________________ From: Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wed, July 6, 2011 12:38:43 PM Subject: Re: Ads on IBM-MAIN In <listserv%[email protected]>, on 07/05/2011 at 08:00 AM, Alan Altmark <[email protected]> said: >Whether it's free or not isn't the issue. There is a significant >difference among >(1) calling out a product (commercial or freeware) as a possible >solution to a posted problem >(2) the author occasionally posting a reminder of his product >(3)discussing the technical aspects of the product (4)Announcing a new product or a new release. >I don't object to the second since the product is free and has >demonstrated benefit to the readership. That doesn't justify posting an advertisement. OTOH, I see nothing wrong with a tombstone reference in the sig >The third, however, is Technical Support and can be reasonably >requested to reside in another forum. If it's a mainframe product then I see nothing wrong with technical support here. That's especially true for products involving multiple vendors or multiple divisions of the same vendor. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html> We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
