> In a true freedom-loving spirit I will for once take a bold stance and
> say that noone's got the right to force me to adhere to *their* rules
> like that! It invades my individual freedom, it does.
> So if the recipient has a problem with the sender having a problem
> with the recipients filters, that's not the sender's but the
> recipient's problem.
As the curmudgeon who raised the issue (once again) with a polite request
not to add yet another abbreviation (once again), I would like to comment.
1. I did not attempt to ~force~ anyone to follow any rules. I made a
polite request, or at least I ~thought~ it was a polite request - I said,
"Please don't start using a new abbreviation (we have plenty already, don't
we?). Those of us who use filters would appreciate your restraint. Thanks."
2. I just assumed that everyone on this list (with a small number of
notable and mostly historical exceptions) would want to be courteous to all
the others on this list. (I speak as a long-time member of the PDML, so I
honestly feel that this assumption of mine is not "off the wall".)
3. It seems to me as if there are basically two main types of posts on this
list, the Pentax-related posts (my own personal interest) and the various
"PESO" (etc.) posts, which may or may not be Pentax-related (usually not,
even if the photos are taken with Pentax gear - they're really more
"image-related", but that's just my personally biased take on it). Oh,
sure, there's the occasional political and/or religious and/or racial
and/or ethnic set of rants and counter-rants, but they're obviously OT,
whether labeled as such or not.
4. Some time ago on this list, the practice of putting "PESO" (etc.) in
the subject line for threads that are what I am referring to as
"image-related" was started, as a courtesy for all of us, to help identify
the threads featuring this new and different type of
"sort-of-Pentax-related" posts.
5. Some of us use filters to try to deal with the great volume and great
variety of posts here on the PDML. The problem is, of course, if PDML
members wish to keep inventing a NAESO ("new abbreviation every so often")
every week or two, then filtering becomes more and more frustrating and
less and less effective.
6. So, I have (several times, for several new abbreviations) politely
~asked~ people not to use new abbreviations. (After all, is it really all
that necessary?)
7. If it becomes more and more problematic to use filtering, then I myself
simply will not be able to continue dealing with the variety and quantity
of posts on the PDML. I can only speak for myself here, but it would
certainly seem (to me) to be a shame if ~any~ PDML member interested in
Pentax equipment ended up leaving the PDML, simply because of the volume of
"only-somewhat-Pentax-related" posts could not easily be sorted out with
filtering.
8. The above is not meant as any sort of threat, but just as a matter of
fact - nobody would care if I left the PDML - my occasional alleged
contributions over the past several years have probably been of little use
to the vast majority of PDML members.
9. Those of you that want to invent new abbreviations frequently can just
continue doing so, without me or anyone else annoying you with polite
requests to show us some small courtesy. Or, maybe you can set up your own
filters, so that such requests would be filtered out automatically.
10. My name is "Fred", and I don't plan on changing that, so you can
easily filter out any (all) of my annoying posts any time you want. Or,
you could filter for "please", "appreciate", "restraint", or "thanks". Or,
if all else fails, you could just filter out any posts involving
"Pentax"...
I (sort of) apologize for using a NAESO. :-|
Fred
