Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
Well, supposedly there is this Japanese whiskey - Suntory? - which has on it´s label: beware of imitations. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http:\\www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: Daniel J. Matyola [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 11:46 PM Subject: Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions How true! Nick Clark wrote: There's no such thing as scotch whiskey!
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
- Original Message - From: Raimo K Subject: Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions Well, supposedly there is this Japanese whiskey - Suntory? - which has on it´s label: beware of imitations. I have tried their pseudo Scotch. I can't imagine wanting to imitate it. The only malt whisky I have tasted that was worse was a Nova Scotia malt whisky that had a distinctive sewer flavour. William Robb
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
- Original Message - From: Doug Brewer Subject: Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions Going into competition, John? He's setting up a mailing list dedicated to cameras and photography, and leaving you with the one about racing cars, beer, scotch whisky, and politics. William Robb
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
At 10:14 AM 4/12/04, throwing caution to the wind, William Robb wrote: He's setting up a mailing list dedicated to cameras and photography, and leaving you with the one about racing cars, beer, scotch whisky, and politics. William Robb hmmm. Seems like I should get first choice of the two.
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
- Original Message - From: Doug Brewer Subject: Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions hmmm. Seems like I should get first choice of the two. You do get the racing cars and the beer..
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Doug Brewer Subject: Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions Going into competition, John? He's setting up a mailing list dedicated to cameras and photography, and leaving you with the one about racing cars, beer, scotch whisky, and politics. Well *I'm* setting up a mailing list dedicated to racing motorcycles, beer, scotch whiskey and politics. We'll probably discuss photography there... -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
Going into competition, John? He's setting up a mailing list dedicated to cameras and photography, and leaving you with the one about racing cars, beer, scotch whisky, and politics. William Robb So you'll be sticking around then Bill? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
- Original Message - From: Cotty Subject: Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions So you'll be sticking around then Bill? Me? Off topic? You mock me. William Robb
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
There's no such thing as scotch whiskey! Nick -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/04/04 15:48:41 Well *I'm* setting up a mailing list dedicated to racing motorcycles, beer, scotch whiskey and politics.
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
Argh! Now look what you've done, Cotty... :-) S John Forbes wrote: Random Spelling Dictionary. One to avoid. You will NEVER find Scotch whisky calling itself whiskey. John On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 16:50:42 -0400, Otis Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Random House Dictionary says there is. Not shortage of experts here Have another drink and go back to sleep. It won't matter in the morning... Otis Wright Nick Clark wrote: There's no such thing as scotch whiskey! Nick -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/04/04 15:48:41 Well *I'm* setting up a mailing list dedicated to racing motorcycles, beer, scotch whiskey and politics.
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
I guess so Oooops found Scotch Whisky in MW's book of words. Maybe you should publish your book of words. Knew you had trouble with right and wrong. Didn't know it had progressed this far. Otis Keith Whaley wrote: That won't be the first instance of their being wrong that they've made... And, if they say Scotch Whiskey IS correct, they're wrong! keith Otis Wright wrote: Random House Dictionary says there is. Not shortage of experts here Have another drink and go back to sleep. It won't matter in the morning... Otis Wright Nick Clark wrote: There's no such thing as scotch whiskey! Nick -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/04/04 15:48:41 Well *I'm* setting up a mailing list dedicated to racing motorcycles, beer, scotch whiskey and politics.
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
Just don't want to confuse the real thing with those wanabees! Nick -Original Message- From: Otis Wright[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/04/04 23:44:15 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions I guess so Oooops found Scotch Whisky in MW's book of words. Maybe you should publish your book of words. Knew you had trouble with right and wrong. Didn't know it had progressed this far. Otis Keith Whaley wrote: That won't be the first instance of their being wrong that they've made... And, if they say Scotch Whiskey IS correct, they're wrong! keith Otis Wright wrote: Random House Dictionary says there is. Not shortage of experts here Have another drink and go back to sleep. It won't matter in the morning... Otis Wright Nick Clark wrote: There's no such thing as scotch whiskey! Nick -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/04/04 15:48:41 Well *I'm* setting up a mailing list dedicated to racing motorcycles, beer, scotch whiskey and politics.
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
- Original Message - From: Otis Wright Subject: Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions Random House Dictionary says there is. Not shortage of experts here The Scots spell it whisky. I got called out on it a while back. William Robb
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
Now that makes sense... Especially, to one whose spelling skills are non existent. Otis William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Otis Wright Subject: Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions Random House Dictionary says there is. Not shortage of experts here The Scots spell it whisky. I got called out on it a while back. William Robb
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
Otis Wright wrote: I guess so Oooops found Scotch Whisky in MW's book of words. Maybe you should publish your book of words. Knew you had trouble with right and wrong. Didn't know it had progressed this far. You talking to Nick or Mark? keith g Otis Keith Whaley wrote: That won't be the first instance of their being wrong that they've made... And, if they say Scotch Whiskey IS correct, they're wrong! keith Otis Wright wrote: Random House Dictionary says there is. Not shortage of experts here Have another drink and go back to sleep. It won't matter in the morning... Otis Wright Nick Clark wrote: There's no such thing as scotch whiskey! Nick -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/04/04 15:48:41 Well *I'm* setting up a mailing list dedicated to racing motorcycles, beer, scotch whiskey and politics.
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
So you'll be sticking around then Bill? Me? Off topic? You mock me. William Robb In one ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
On 12/4/04, A JOLLY MAN discumbobulated: Argh! Now look what you've done, Cotty... :-) Not guilty. But thank you. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
VS: NEW_PUG - questions
By the amount of mail I think that there are more members than that. IIRC we have had 500 subscribers at best. Maybe more? Lurkers have to pay if they want to see the posts. All the best! Raimo -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Lähetetty: 11. huhtikuuta 2004 20:34 Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aihe: Re: NEW_PUG - questions Get real. We are more likely talking 20-30 contributers, $200-300 a year, which would pay for the site, but no one is going to get rich from that. Of course it is possible that lurkers who never would submit a photo might contribute, but I would be very surprised at 100 total. In my opinion, it would be very nice if the Pugmeister could put a few shekels in her own pocket, but I kind of doubt it will happen. On the other hand, from personal experience, I know that members of this list can be very generous. -- Raimo K wrote: We are not talking about lunches here. With a fee of 10 USD and 500 subscribers it would be 5000 USD a year. Not too bad. All the best! -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
Honestly, folks. The PUG rose out of the need for a place for PDML members to share pictures with each other and the world. It was supposed to be free from the beginning; as free as PDML itself. While there is no direct connection between the two, the PUG was conceived by the PDML, and it is on this List most of the communication over the images take place. The lurkers appreciate the comments they receive just as much as the rest of us. The PUG should continue to be free if we can at all keep it that way. If contributions become necessary, it has to be on a voluntary basis. Anything else is a commecialising. I am truly surprised and somewhat disappointed that some people would want that kind of solution. Jostein Quoting Raimo K [EMAIL PROTECTED]: By the amount of mail I think that there are more members than that. IIRC we have had 500 subscribers at best. Maybe more? Lurkers have to pay if they want to see the posts. All the best! Raimo This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
I would summarize what I have heard so far as follows: a. many are willing to help out to keep the PUG alive. b. the notion of a contributor's fee was raised but most do not agree. c. the notion of a voluntary contribution has been endorsed by many. With maybe an acknowledgments page someplace on the site. d. Jostein has asked 'why all the talk about money anyway - we can keep it free' (my paraphrase, not a direct quote.) My humble opinion: a. If there are expenses, all PDML and PUG participants should have an opportunity to contribute a small amount. No one should be required to contribute. b. It would be good to have a stable, paid ISP with adequate room, ample bandwidth, etc. Free is nice, but a small contribution from a fraction of users would be sufficient to buy adequate service without relying on charity from service providers. Stan Jostein wrote: Honestly, folks. The PUG rose out of the need for a place for PDML members to share pictures with each other and the world. It was supposed to be free from the beginning; as free as PDML itself. While there is no direct connection between the two, the PUG was conceived by the PDML, and it is on this List most of the communication over the images take place. The lurkers appreciate the comments they receive just as much as the rest of us. The PUG should continue to be free if we can at all keep it that way. If contributions become necessary, it has to be on a voluntary basis. Anything else is a commecialising. I am truly surprised and somewhat disappointed that some people would want that kind of solution. Jostein Quoting Raimo K [EMAIL PROTECTED]: By the amount of mail I think that there are more members than that. IIRC we have had 500 subscribers at best. Maybe more? Lurkers have to pay if they want to see the posts. All the best! Raimo This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
Hi Stan, Substitute your hyphen with the word if, and your paraphrasing is much closer. :-) Anyway, I was just iterating what Adelheid said earlier. See the archives at: http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss%40pdml.net/msg176389.html Jostein - Original Message - From: Stan Halpin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2004 10:25 PM Subject: Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions d. Jostein has asked 'why all the talk about money anyway - we can keep it free' (my paraphrase, not a direct quote.) My humble opinion: a. If there are expenses, all PDML and PUG participants should have an opportunity to contribute a small amount. No one should be required to contribute. b. It would be good to have a stable, paid ISP with adequate room, ample bandwidth, etc. Free is nice, but a small contribution from a fraction of users would be sufficient to buy adequate service without relying on charity from service providers. Stan
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
Hi! Jostein, I'd second your opinion here. I really think that contribution should be voluntary and no specific amount should be set. Of course, the amount should be reasonable but not limited either from above or from below. There're many odd ways at which a group may limit its free members but I really think that any such thing would counter the nature of PDML. May I suggest the following simple thing. Let us all, who's willing to contribute, write Adelheide and you an off-line message with amount that they would be initially willing to provide. After that, it would be not difficult to see whether and what kind of solution PDML could really afford for its PUG. Thanks! Boris ([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: VS: NEW_PUG - questions
Let's not get too busy dreaming up payment schemes, folks. If Adelheid Jostein are happy, the only expense would be the domain name registration. I now own pdml.us, and I'm not asking for contributions for at least the next 2 years :-)
