Terry, Bill and all others...
Thank you for all the information that I didn't know I needed to know! This
discussion sure gives me a
lot of ideas of where to lurk, look, poke, unscrew, clean, lube and light...and a lot
of other stuff I
would have gotten into trouble doing as a kid!
Judy
72 27 International Ambassador
Bill Scott wrote:
> Hans, and every other listener and lurker on this list. I think Terry
> Tyler's response was right on target. The differences between this
> list and the Question and Answer Forum, ( now on hiatus) and a Chat
> line, are profound. This list is a "Discussion", because all listees
> are invited to participate. If I only sent a response to you Hans, to
> one of your questions, then it would not be a discussion,..........it
> would just be an answer. Since there are many ways to fix different
> problems, and many ways to restore your coach, we want everyone to
> participate, that can add to the discussion. The chit chat and fluff
> that you might be referring to perhaps is the short one line responses,
> that some people throw in, because they want to acknowledge the fact or
> say "Thanks". One of the reasons the Question and Answer Forum has not
> been very successful, is because only one person at a time has been
> answering the questions. No one person, can answer all this stuff.
> This is, after all, a "Group", and of the 270 plus users, and
> participants, only about 50 of them actively participate. I agree with
> Terry, you must delete everyday, to keep up with the traffic. Read and
> learn.
>
> Bill Scott
> 61 Bambi, VAC & WBCCI #3221
> 1VP & Membership Chairman , WDCU
> http://www.servintfree.net/wbcci-dc/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: [VAC] mailings
> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:25:38 -0400
> From: "terry tyler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Hi Hans,
>
> No offense taken. When you put 260 people in a group, there are that many reasons
>for them being in
> the group. Some like the messages handled the way you described (see your posting
>below) and some
> like to read ALL the messages so they can learn things they hadn't realized they
>might need know.
> Undoubtedly, there are dozens of other reasons in between.
>
> I do believe that although a majority of the group's letters are aimed at a specific
>sender instead
> of the group as a whole, the intention is for the group as a whole to receive them
>and to either
> supplement the ideas, point out the risks or support them.
>
> In my opinion, together - the full group has a better chance of offering a broad
>based,
> comprehensive perspective to one members question than one person contributing to
>the answer by
> replying directly and privately to the questioner. On many occasions, I read second
>and third
> replies with additional details supplementing an already solid answer by someone
>else.
>
> If it was me asking the question, I'd want that to occur. I'd want to feel the
>subtleties and have
> the opportunity to challenge my understanding by asking more questions. My favorite
>time for
> starting a task is after I've given a lot of thought to the sequence for doing it
>and have all my
> tools and supplies ready to use. This free wheeling discussion group helps me to do
>that.
>
> What's the solution to the issue you raised? Each of us has to decide. For me, the
>decision is
> simple. I scan the topics and speed read those which interest me. It rarely takes
>more than 10
> seconds per message. If I don't want to reply, I delete. Within a minute or two,
>I've narrowed the
> postings to only those I want to write a reply. On any one evening, my VAC time (1/2
>to 1 hour) is a
> small portion of my total computer time on related activities. For me, that's
>peanuts.
>
> The current VAC system of having what amounts to a group discussion every day with
>different people
> contributing to it - works for me. It's easy, it's fun and it's an opportunity for
>me to learn new
> things each evening with the mere expense of an hour of my time. I look forward to
>that hour.
>
> As a crusty old New Englander and Mayflower Pilgrim, I have a hot button when it
>comes to wanting
> unlimited access to knowledge. There have been many generations in my family where
>the opportunity
> for freedom of thought and unlimited access to the ideas of others was intensely
>reinforced in me. I
> don't want any truck with other people narrowing my options, even if done benignly
>in the spirit of
> trying to be helpful. I want to be my own judge of that. But, I'm glad you brought
>up the topic and
> asked the question. Until you did, I hadn't thought about it at all. Thanks for
>prompting me to
> think it through.
>
> Bottom line for me. The more email postings the merrier. I'd rather be the one who
>decides what I
> want to learn than to have information withheld from me because someone thinks I
>might not be
> interested. Let me be the determiner of what interests me. <grin> Let me make the
>choice of using my
> delete button or not. (Yea! Yea!)
>
> Let me learn at my pace, at my convenience, with my skills and with whatever
>ingenuity or reading
> talent I can muster up. Then, when I fail the first time, it's my own stupid fault.
>But, if I should
> succeed and do it right the first time, then hip hip hurray for the discussion group
>and all the
> benefit of whatever insight I might have gathered from it.
>
> Terry
> ===============
>
> >Hello all fellow Airstreamers. I am a very new member to this site, so
> >please don't get offended by my question! I have only received e-mail
> >from you for four days, but have during that period received more than
> >200 e-mail. While I have learned a lot and appreciate every letter
> >addressed personally to me, I do believe that a great deal of your
> >letters are aimed at a specific sender instead of the group as a whole.
> >I can only speak for myself, but I do think it would make my daily email
> >business a little easier if everybody asked themselves whether this or
> >that is of interest to the entire group or not.
> >Thank you for your time.
> >Hans
> >
