Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.A4D86BCC@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:44:39 +0100 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.A4D86BCC" x-vm-v5-data: ([nil nil nil nil t nil nil nil nil][nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: {2} Re: {1} LaTeX-L: what should it be called Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1992 10:44:31 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Robin Fairbairns" Sender: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" To: "Multiple recipients of" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 648 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.A4D86BCC Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Phil writes: >You cannot subscribe to a list unless you know that it exists. People >started subscribing to LaTeX-L when it became `open' and its existence >was announced. The announcement _I_ saw was in comp.text.tex; it made very clear that it was a list for supporting the software developers. My assumption was that we were getting the strays because there's a Bitnet list of lists, and LaTeX-L appears on it. Now, when I tried subscribing to it via CUNYVM (to avoid the horrible UK Bitnet gateway), I seem to remember that it complained that there are two LATEX-L Bitnet lists, and that I needed to direct my subscription to the relevant host, direct. Perhaps this is the source of the problem. > It is unfortunate that some individuals have either >accidentally or deliberately abused the list by sending irrelevant >questions, but I cannot see how changing its name to a meaningless >string (of course, `1729' may not be meaningless in Sanskrit, but only >Dominik would know that :-)) I bet there are others ;-) Phil's statement applies only in a rather limited universe of discourse! > will help. Why not (a) call it what it is >(a discussion list for LaTeX-3): hence `LaTeX-3'; (b) reduce its >tolerance from `open' to `open by moderator's agreement', and (c) = revoke >membership for its abusers? ** Phil. All of which would be made clear in the automatically-generated announcement message that new subscribers get. I agree with Phil. Robin Robin Fairbairns, Senior Consultant, postmaster and general dogsbody (including the nearest we have to a TeXnician here) Laser-Scan Ltd., Science Park, Milton Rd., Cambridge CB4 4FY, UK Email: robin@lsl.co.uk --or-- rf@cl.cam.ac.uk ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.A4D86BCC Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable {2} Re: {1} LaTeX-L: what should it be called

Phil writes:

>You cannot subscribe to a list unless you know = that it exists.   People
>started subscribing to LaTeX-L when it became = `open' and its existence
>was announced.

The announcement _I_ saw was in comp.text.tex; it made = very clear that
it was a list for supporting the software = developers.  My assumption was
that we were getting the strays because there's a = Bitnet list of lists,
and LaTeX-L appears on it.

Now, when I tried subscribing to it via CUNYVM (to = avoid the horrible UK
Bitnet gateway), I seem to remember that it = complained that there are
two LATEX-L Bitnet lists, and that I needed to direct = my subscription to
the relevant host, direct.  Perhaps this is the = source of the problem.

>          =       It is unfortunate that some individuals = have either
>accidentally or deliberately abused the list by = sending irrelevant
>questions, but I cannot see how changing its name = to a meaningless
>string (of course, `1729' may not be meaningless = in Sanskrit, but only
>Dominik would know that :-))

I bet there are others ;-)  Phil's statement = applies only in a rather
limited universe of discourse!

>          =             &= nbsp;      will help. Why not (a) call it what = it is
>(a discussion list for LaTeX-3): hence `LaTeX-3'; = (b) reduce its
>tolerance from `open' to `open by moderator's = agreement', and (c) revoke
>membership for its abusers?  ** Phil.

All of which would be made clear in the = automatically-generated
announcement message that new subscribers get.  = I agree with Phil.
        =         =         =         =         =         =         =         Robin

Robin Fairbairns, Senior Consultant, postmaster and = general dogsbody
          &nbs= p;        (including the nearest we = have to a TeXnician here)
Laser-Scan Ltd., Science Park, Milton Rd., Cambridge = CB4 4FY, UK
Email: robin@lsl.co.uk  --or--  = rf@cl.cam.ac.uk

------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.A4D86BCC--