OK - now this thread has become completely [OT] territory. And, for folks like me that don't subscribe to the [OT] list - please move [OT] discussions to where they TRULY Belong!
TIA, -K- -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pete Theisen Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 5:30 AM Bill Arnold wrote: > differentiation between "speakers" and "listeners", or some way to > throttle or mute attention-diverting nonsense other then individual > filters, because the detriment is at the group level - but it's > possible that such a mechanic is implicit in a 'virtual room' > context. What are the odds that a mindless chatterbox will ante up > $100 to join a virtual group, walk into it's room, sputter nonsense > repeatedly, and not get "booed" off the stage? Hi Bill, How did you do on that poll? The one about booting our buddy off the list? What did you get, four total votes, one agreeing with you? I suggest a third category. In addition to the two you mentioned we could add "brownshirts". >>> OT was much nicer back in the days before it became >> necessary to segregate the OT. >> >> >> Well, of course - that was the main reason we had to segregate OT. >> -- Regards, Pete http://pete-theisen.com/ _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/289ea162f5642645b5cf64d624c66a14071a1...@us-ny-mail-002.waitex.net ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
