Willard McCarty <MCCARTY@vm.epas.utoronto.ca> (01/19/90)
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 3, No. 943. Thursday, 18 Jan 1990. Date: Thu, 18 Jan 90 08:19:12 EST From: Natalie Maynor <MAYNOR@MSSTATE> Subject: Re: 3.938 e-seminars; more on Bloom et al. (106) Although I agree, of course, that we have Willard to thank for much of the success of HUMANIST, I'm writing to tell those of you who subscribe to only a few lists that there are certain advantages of unmoderated lists. True, unmoderated lists often include junk- mail: requests that should be sent to the listserv are sometimes sent to the whole list, redundant answers are given to a question, etc. (sorry about that -- I *like* "etc."). In spite of having to delete junk-mail, I prefer the fast flow of unmoderated lists. Because they are making full use of the speed of e-mail, the discussions tend to be livelier. And because each posting arrives separately, it is easier to delete unread or partially read those not of interest -- i.e., grouped mailings require wading through three postings not of interest in order to reach number four. Again let me say that there are trade-offs and that clearly Willard's work has made HUMANIST an efficient list. Recent postings, however, have made me think that some of you may not be aware of the cornucopia of lists out there, many of which are quite active and quite interesting -- unlike ENGLISH, which is neither of the above.