[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
>Might I recommend filtering out messages which include "SCO" or a
>variety of related words? Filtering out people (myself likely included,
>as I boringly reflect on "beauracracy at the W3C") whose attitude you
>don't like?
Filtering is one thing. Working with other participants in
maintaining list relevancy is another thing entirely.
I already have a filter for xml-dev that puts it in its own mailbox,
sorted, threaded.
>I don't feel obligated to read every word of xml-dev, and I have a fair
>number of filters. Both of these tactics reduce my blood pressure
>substantially. Okay, fine, I'm still cranky, but then I (mis?)read the
>first reply I ever got here as calling me a bozo.
I do feel compelled to read every xml-dev post, because this practice
has bourne much fruit over the years and is somewhat necessary when
people get out of the practice of using the Subject: field properly.
It is a good way to learn new things, and it generally is a helpful
practice - unless of course there is a soapbox festival going on, in
which case it becomes extraordinarily tedious ... like this thread
I'm now contributing to has become.
So, whatever. No more of this from me. I'll go back to lurk mode on
xml-dev (where I have been for years) and try to ignore the politics,
beauracracy, and NIH'ilisms ... but I sure hope someone out there
feels compelled to talk about XML every now and then.
--
;
Jay Vaughan
r&d>>music:technology:synthesizers - www.access-music.de/
*
|
