Re: Too much mail

Thats okay, Chris. I've been told Dinsdale Piranha nailed your head to the floor. What? Old Dinsy? Naah - he wouldn't do a thing like that. Not Dinsy! Well, maybe just a little bit.

Re: Too much mail

In a message dated 2/25/2004 12:51:32 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So, Marnie, Don't leave us. In fact, you're not allowed to leave. Not because I say so, but because the PDML gods say so. You're spiritually a member, regardless of whether you have any Px

Re: Too much mail

There is not question that the traffic has increased, but I agree that there are many who like the PAW stuff better then the technical stuff. I think we just have to be more careful about labeling. I for one find that I just delete entire threads because I have no time to look at them. I try

Re: Too much mail

On 24/2/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: And hasn't Cotty presented us with some neat Canon (whoops, C***n) images? Guess he'd better lose the camera or get outta here. In mitigation your honour, my PUG images are courtesy of a Pentax lens :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) |

Re: Too much mail

I thought I should add my support to the PAW concept in its current incarnation. I'll personally try to average one photo a week (or fewer), I guess. I disagree with the suggestion of limiting the photos to those taken with Pentax equipment - there's already the PUG for that, and besides, I

Re: Too much mail

LOL But Ann, Raimo said nothing about the PAW being the cause of the list being too busy, did he? I noticed he pout up a link to his photography page as well. As for sending comments privately, I know that's done, but it's also valuable to send many of the comments via the list since that's a

Re: Too much mail

On 23 Feb 2004 at 20:00, Shel Belinkoff wrote: So, some cranky minority wants to curtail the PAW, limit discussions resulting from it, reduce it to a once a week Friday event, because they can't handle it. You're sounding like a cranky old fart Shel, lighten up, the Friday suggestion was

Re: Too much mail

On 23 Feb 2004 at 20:00, Shel Belinkoff wrote: So, some cranky minority wants to curtail the PAW, limit discussions resulting from it, reduce it to a once a week Friday event, because they can't handle it. Doh, make that... I read it as a picture-a-week, no? Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE

Re: Too much mail

And some of us have worked very hard to make the photographs we present here. So, bitch all you want about OT stuff, but lay of the PAW and the posting of photographs. Doug Brewer wrote: At 11:00 PM 2/23/04, throwing caution to the wind, Shel Belinkoff wrote: I didn't see anyone

Re: Too much mail

I was referring to making once a week ON FRIDAY. i.e., limiting the posting to but one designated day per week, as opposed to once a week on whatever day suits the poster. Plus, the idea of picture a week was more a reference to the Leica format than what we might do here, although I feel that if

Re: Too much mail

At 10:21 AM 2/24/04, throwing caution to the wind, Shel Belinkoff wrote: And some of us have worked very hard to make the photographs we present here. So, bitch all you want about OT stuff, but lay of the PAW and the posting of photographs. What the hell are you talking about? I haven't said a

Re: Too much mail

Forgive if I misinterpreted your comments ... Doug Brewer wrote: At 10:21 AM 2/24/04, throwing caution to the wind, Shel Belinkoff wrote: And some of us have worked very hard to make the photographs we present here. So, bitch all you want about OT stuff, but lay of the PAW and the

Re: Too much mail

I'm getting quite a bit of private mail, some it it rather rude, on this topic. I cannot believe that something as simple as the suggestion of posting pics to the list could generate such controversy and animosity. There are other, much nicer messages as well, so that sort of balances the crap

RE: Too much mail

Yes, there is too much mail, we now have over 400 per day coming in, that might be ok for the people that don't work and have time to download and go through all the posts. I work and in the past week just don't have the time to go through my email. Just a download, quick look and delete all. With

Re: Too much mail

On 24/2/04, A PDML SUBSCRIBER disgorged: I guess I feel I have to look if it is a picture and if it is WHISKEY or SPORTS CARS I can delete without guilt. :) Sorry guys, but I am going to have to chime in here - AFAIK, *both* those threads mentioned above carried 'OT' in the subject line. If you

Re: Too much mail

A little tact would be good here, Shel. This is Doug's list. You we can do without, him we can not. Sometimes OT gets a little out of hand, but it dies down. You have introduced this PAW thing which mostly is good. I do think however that the one on the Leica list you modeled it after limits

Re: Too much mail

I wonder if the different personalities of this list and the EOS list have to do with the fact that nowadays you have to be a bit of a rebel, or perhaps just a curmudgeon, to stick to Pentax while the sheep are flocking to Canon and Nikon. John Who has noticed that the most frequent posts are

RE: Too much mail

You missed a couple didn't you... :) there is always the digest version and reading the posts online sorted already by subject. This list is plain text only, thus it doesn't use much bandwidth. I'm on dialup and I don't have any problems. Lots of folks unsubscribe temporarily when their going

Re: Too much mail

In a message dated 2/24/2004 10:48:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sometimes OT gets a little out of hand, but it dies down. You have introduced this PAW thing which mostly is good. I do think however that the one on the Leica list you modeled it after limits photos to

Re: Too much mail

On 24/2/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I wonder if the different personalities of this list and the EOS list have to do with the fact that nowadays you have to be a bit of a rebel, or perhaps just a curmudgeon, to stick to Pentax while the sheep are flocking to Canon and Nikon. John Fair

RE: Too much mail

Frankly, it seems that there are enough people here who like the concept just the way it is. I agree. I think the PAW is great the way it is. It has already allowed me to display a couple of shots here that I couldn't have posted on the PUG for one reason or another. We always talk about the

Re: Too much mail

indulgence for this longish (for me) post. cheers, frank The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Too much mail Date: Tue, 24 Feb

Re: Too much mail

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:53:20 +, Cotty wrote: I'd like to complain about the people complaining about too many posts. There's a penguin on the telly! Intercourse the penguin! TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ

Re: Too much mail

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Cotty wrote: Who has noticed that the most frequent posts are now from people complaining about too many posts. I'd like to complain about the people complaining about too many posts. That's okay, Cotty. The people responsible for sacking the people who complained have

Re: Too much mail

- Original Message - From: Chris Brogden Subject: Re: Too much mail On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Cotty wrote: Who has noticed that the most frequent posts are now from people complaining about too many posts. I'd like to complain about the people complaining about too many posts

Re: Too much mail

Ann, you don't have to unsubscribe the list will do it for you. At 09:10 AM 2/24/04, you wrote: Shel Belinkoff wrote: LOL But Ann, Raimo said nothing about the PAW being the cause of the list being too busy, did he? I noticed he pout up a link to his photography page as well. I guess I

Re: Too much mail

I tend to agree - while PAW has some niceties, it has generated a large amount of traffic. As long as the Subject has that nice, big PAW in front of it, at least it can be handled easily. -- Best regards, Bruce Monday, February 23, 2004, 1:00:08 PM, you wrote: RK PDML is too active now -

Re: Too much mail

Raimo K wrote: PDML is too active now - which in itself is a good thing - but I have difficulties in keeping up so I think I´ll have to unsubscribe for awhile. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http:\\www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho I second that -- Perhaps some of the

Re: Too much mail

Hi! I'd second Frank's opinion. I must say that now I delete *istD related and OT threads with much lighter hand so to say. But then I call my wife and when she can we sit together though PAW messages and enjoy it. I do agree however that PAW has to be exactly that PAWeek g. What I mean is like:

Re: Too much mail

] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Too much mail Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 21:52:04 -0500 Raimo K wrote: PDML is too active now - which in itself is a good thing - but I have difficulties in keeping up so I think I´ll have to unsubscribe for awhile. All the best

Re: Too much mail

of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Too much mail Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 21:12:41 -0800 Hello frank, My post was only meant to indicate