[13208] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Re: Bright spots from the old PACS-L?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Kessler)
Thu Mar 23 21:16:01 2000
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 09:53:36 -0800
From: Jack Kessler <kessler@WELL.COM>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.HPP.3.96.1000321084407.14223A-100000@garnet.iupui.edu>
To: PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU>
Message-Id: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10003220945590.22342-100000@well.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Jim Morgan's point about the multiplicity of lists spawned by
PACS-L underscores the advantage of resuscitating PACS-L now:
precisely -- it's the multiplicity of lists. I subscribe to 12
myself, now. My personal information overload from them recently
became outrageous -- 200+ email messages per day, a large an
increasing portion of those spam and other irrelevant.
So for me, and I think for others, once again there is a need for
a few more general albeit well disciplined lists, like PACS-L, so
that we can unsubscribe from some of the too - specialized lists
to which we have migrated. That's what I'm doing, anyway.
Jack Kessler, kessler@well.sf.ca.us
