And no, I didn't know that Tammy and you separated. Hang in there. Bill
---- Charles Goldsmith <[email protected]> wrote: > Bill, I'm not trying to stoke any fires or stir up any problems, I wanted > you to be aware of this. You made a comment to me the other day in a > private email. I didn't forward or mention it to anyone, I'm guessing that > you have made this comment to someone else and it was then told to Don or > forwarded. > > Hope all is well and Tammy says hey back :) > > BTW, you probably haven't heard, but Tammy and I have separated. The good > news is, we have our best friends back, we were good friends before being > married, and are again. Strange I know, we are both too hard headed to live > with each other, but make great friends. > > Say howdy to Diana for me. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Louise Power <[email protected]> > Date: Jan 15, 2008 11:44 AM > Subject: RE: [Texascavers] OTtex vs. Cavetex > To: Charles Goldsmith <[email protected]> > > Hi Charles, > > Boy, Wes is way out of line. I, personally, think you've shown remarkable > restraint through this whole brouhaha and I commend you for it. You > chastized me once for a political comment and I took that to heart. > > You may be interested to know that I found out yesterday from Don Cooper > that Bill Steel is automatically deleting anything from him, me or David > Locklear. Like I give a big rat's patootie. My happiness and self esteem > does not rise and fall on whether or not somebody reads my e-mail. > Oo-o-o-o-o! Others should not take a threat of this kind of censorship so > seriously. After all, that's what I recommended recently for things you > didn't want to read. Anyway, six months from now, nobody will care. Ten > years (or maybe even one year) from now, nobody will remember. > > Thank you for taking on this thankless task and, since you won't take money, > take my everlasting gratitude and support for the great, even-handed job > you're doing. > > Louise > > ------------------------------ > Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:59:10 -0600 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > CC: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Texascavers] OTtex vs. Cavetex > > Wes, this mailing has never been moderated, even long before I volunteered > to host it. Back when Bill Bentley asked for a volunteer to take over it, > I'm pretty sure that I'm the only one who did volunteer. I host this list > out of my own pocket, I'm not paid to do it, and it certainly does cost me a > few dollars a month to do so, plus time spent taking care of the few > administrative tasks. I even paid for the transfer of the domain from Bill, > reimbursed him for payments he had pre-paid on the hosting, and also picked > up the old cavetex.net domain when it became available, all out of my own > pocket. > > Wes, I've never seen you offer to donate any cash to help with this cause, a > few people have, and I've politely turned them down. I do this as a service > to the caving community, it's my way of giving back. Why didn't you > volunteer to host and admin this list when asked? > > I'm damned well not going to be told how to run this list by a single > person. If the community as a whole wants to change things, we will, but I > won't moderate it, someone else will have to step up to host, admin and then > moderate. You don't dictate to me how things are run, try it again and > you'll be gone quicker than you can say huh. That goes for anyone else that > wants to complain how I host it. > > Now, don't get me wrong, I'm mostly an easy going guy, but until someone > else puts the work into it, I'm not going to be criticized on how things are > done here. > > No one has asked to be unsubscribed from this list to be put on the OT one, > it's setup as a secondary list for the people that want to use it. I did > not and will not copy the subscriber list from this list over to OT, it will > have to be a voluntary subscription on everyones part that wants to join in > at OT. > > Everyone, please review the recommendations on > http://texascavers.com/about.html about posting here, that includes this > email thread, but I'm going to post this anyway to everyone, just so that > they know the facts. > > Also, keep in mind, I'm not asking for money, I never have and probably > never will, I just want everyone to be aware of the circumstances. > > If you have questions about any of this, please reply off list to me. > Thanks > Charles > > On 1/15/08, *wesley s* <[email protected]> wrote: > > Divisive to say the least! This is like a political party schism. The > attempt to purge the unwanted instigators will only weaken the group as a > whole and create more animosity on the part of the fence sitters who stayed > out of the argument but generally support the system. This is a really half > assed solution if you ask me. > Yes we could ask every caver to delete his/her inbox full of OT posts and be > done with it but this relies on too many people's adherence to a logical > course action. Furthermore it is, as has already been stated, effectively > spam. This sort of activity has been tolerated far too long and the creation > of this new listserv is pandering to the perpetrators in order to not be > accused of censorship. Unfortunately censoring is exactly what should be > done. The list populous has made it abundantly clear that they do not > appreciate the off topic rants and threads and wishes there to be some sort > of regulation of this listserv. Why, Charles Goldsmith, have you elected to > be so lax? > "While I host this mailing list, I let you folks moderate it, I'm not going > to. If I get enough people complaining about one or more users, I'll send > out a warning email, outlining the rules and asking to please stop. If it > continues, I'll remove you from the list, that simple. However, out of all > of this, I have yet to receive any emails about it, I think the community > took care of itself in this matter." > If you are unable or unwilling to be a moderator for this listserv than we > need to find someone who is and have this thing moderated like all the > others on the great wide web. There is a reason why moderators are a > ubiquitous feature on listserves. Humans wander in their thoughts and if > they are posting to a topic limited list they are bound to stray off topic. > That is where the moderator comes in and steers the individual or thread > back on course. And passive moderating does not work! > "These topics seem to run their courses over a short period of time, but I > do think that some of them should be answered off list to the person > directly." > This is not a solution! It is lethargy. And furthermore the audacity of > those individuals who attempt to link their topic by six degrees of > separation to caving somehow are not fooling anyone. We know you're trying > to mask the issue. > Perhaps those individuals who simply want to have wild, broad discussions > about anything and everything would be better served by a separate listserv > but I hardly think they are a large enough group to sustain a separate list. > Consequently they will come back and continue posting OT emails to Cavetex. > We need regulation. Not because it is necessary to stifle entertaining > discussions and keep caver thought and opinions in line, but because it is > discourteous to the entire subscribership to let the posts become more than > say 30% off topic. I enjoy some of these threads as much as Kara and others, > and anyone who knows me knows how anti authoritarian my views are, but in > the name of keeping our subscribers and preserving a place for caver > information exchange on the internet please rein in these individuals. > > Wes~
