: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Ross
Singer
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 7:22 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Unwritten Rules, formerly Pandering for votes for
code4lib sessions
I think the point of the hubbub today is trying
On 2 December 2011 09:33, Munson, Doris dmun...@ewu.edu wrote:
As a relative newcomer to this list, I second the idea that any offenders be
contacted off list with an explanation of any unwritten rules they
unknowingly violate. I suggest this becomes one of c4l's unwritten rules.
I totally
I'm still not even sure why people think the blog post violated any
unwritten rules or expectations. I agree that people kind of
unreasonably raked the author over the coals here.
I think _maybe_ under some interpretations it's borderline (some of
those interpretations are those of the
If it is that important, it should be written down!
-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Chris
Cormack
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 3:36 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Unwritten Rules, formerly Pandering
@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Chris
Cormack
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 3:36 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Unwritten Rules, formerly Pandering for votes for
code4lib sessions
On 2 December 2011 09:33, Munson, Doris dmun...@ewu.edu wrote:
As a relative
] Unwritten Rules, formerly Pandering for votes for
code4lib sessions
On 2 December 2011 09:33, Munson, Doris dmun...@ewu.edu wrote:
As a relative newcomer to this list, I second the idea that any offenders be
contacted off list with an explanation of any unwritten rules they
unknowingly
] On Behalf Of
Wilfred Drew
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 12:51 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Unwritten Rules, formerly Pandering for votes for
code4lib sessions
If it is that important, it should be written down!
-Original Message-
From: Code
: Thursday, December 01, 2011 3:48 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Unwritten Rules, formerly Pandering for votes for
code4lib sessions
I'm still not even sure why people think the blog post violated any unwritten
rules or expectations. I agree that people kind of unreasonably
Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Bohyun
Kim
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 4:24 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Unwritten Rules, formerly Pandering for votes for
code4lib sessions
So this was what pandering a vote meant
@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of
Bohyun Kim
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 4:24 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Unwritten Rules, formerly Pandering for votes for
code4lib sessions
So this was what pandering a vote meant all along? And I guess you are
supposed to know
10 matches
Mail list logo
