I too second Gary Richmonds note. I'd like to add that multiple postings
seem to be adjunct to this problem.
People send to personal mailboxes in addtion to the list.
If just that gets left out, the mass of mails would not look so awfull,
Ia mail is sent to the list,
Jon Awbrey kirjoitti 12.2.2018 16:40:
I also have to unsubscribe periodically, as I don't have time
even to scan for relevance, and many postings recently appear
to move ever so agonizingly and asymptotically toward first
principles without quite grasping them, much less applying
them to non-trivial problems in any field beyond various
folks' hermeneutically sealed bubbles -- but I digress --
At any rate, one thing I find helpful, since I usually
read posts first at the Web Interface, is to toggle
the No Mail subscriber option on, allowing me to
re-send only selected posts to my email inbox
for archiving or reply.
On 2/12/2018 9:01 AM, Everett, Daniel wrote:
Deletion is always a possibility. So is unsubscribing. There are
occasionally (rarely though) useful bits in these disputations about
meaning. As I have tried to point out, they strike me as both
unPeircean (no practical consequences, no problem solved) and not
particularly well-connected to the vast literature on lexical meanings
or cognizant of the kind of “essentialist disputes” that bothers many
I do look through them all, however. The reason is that I am a novice
to Peircean studies and am writing a book (Oxford U P) on the
consequences of his epistemology for modern linguistics (which has
been deeply Cartesian in the main for decades). So when more
experienced Peirce scholars discuss his terms, it can be educational.
I think that the suggestion of taking a few deep breaths before
responding and perhaps responding once a day instead of several times
would/could lead to better responses of more benefit to others.
To delete the messages would require me to know in advance that there
is nothing in them that I want to know. So I look through them and
then delete them if I am going to. Time-consuming.
At the same time, let a hundred flowers bloom. If folks want to keep
shooting out their messages this frequently, so be it. But many of us
will be more likely to read them if they come less frequently. If
these are just personal quibbles, though, perhaps they don’t need to
be on the list. If they are felt worthy for the entire list, frequency
reduction would be useful. But if not, I won’t say another word on the
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at