[441] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Lists--Comments
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Public-Access Computer Systems For)
Mon Jun 8 12:21:00 1992
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 10:42:47 CDT
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
From: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <LIBPACS%UHUPVM1.BITNET@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list PACS-L <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
3 Messages, 75 Lines
*-----
FROM: AXPBBGS --UICVMC
From: Bernie Sloan
Subject: PACS-L
Something's been nagging at me in the back of my mind during the recent
thread of postings dealing with "discussions on the list". Hannah King
had expected it to be more like "French cafe society", but Kerry Webb
said it seemed more like a cocktail party. Kerry finished up by saying
it's really a global extension of the village common.
I was reading my local paper last night (checking to see if they'd
printed my "letter to the editor" yet) when it struck me that the
recent tone of PACS-L has been very much like an international, electronic,
letters-to-the-editor section. Letters-to-the-editor sections of a news-
paper could be considered successors to the types of activity that went
on in the village commons: ordinary people expressing their views on
topics that are important to them. Locally, we seem to have about three
threads running at present: solid waste disposal, abortion, and the
forest preserve district. People are for and against, satisfied and
dissatisfied, logical and less-than-logical. There are flames about
other letter writers. There are totally off the wall letters, and
eloquent well-stated letters. The newspaper publishes them all
(unless they're obscene, slanderous, or anonymous) with little
editing. All in all it's very much like what's been going on
on PACS-L.
I think it's healthy for a local community to have a forum like
the letters-to-the-editor section, and I think it's healthy for
an electronic community to allow the same kind of expression.
They're not read by everyone, and not liked by everyone, but they
serve a purpose.
Bernie Sloan
*-----
From: k.webb@abn.nla.gov.au
Subject: Electronic mail space invaders
Having followed the toing and froing about Bill Drew's postings (and having
been a supporter of what he did with his valuable information), I cannot now
agree with his flaming message on 5 June. What he is saying is the electronic
equivalent of "don't blame the junk mailers - get the money to buy a bigger
mailbox". His agricultural info was _not_ junk mail, but every one of us has
a responsibility to consider whether our messages need to be sent.
Within that context, keep up the good work Bill.
Kerry Webb
National Library of Australia
*-----
From: Janet Perkins <PERKY@corral.uwyo.edu>
Subject: E-mail and Virtual Library
At the risk of being redundant as well as off-topic, I'd like
to add my thoughs about "excessive" or "junk" e-mail. Having been
on several lists, I'm aware of what it's like to deal with a lot
of E-mail everyday, it can be really time-consuming and a bit
frustrating to deal with messages like "Am I on this list?"
My personal policy is to make sure that what I post is at least
semi-intelligent, I think if we all did this, there would be
better utilization of this valuable resource.
Because I just joined this list, let me introduce myself. I'm
Janet Perkins, I'm working on my master's in Instructional
Technology at the University of Wyoming. Currently, I'm
interested in Virtual Libraries/electronic libraries and their
potential to serve persons with disabilities. If anyone has any
thoughts on this topic, plese send them to me. Thanks!
Janet Perkins
perky@corral.uwyo.edu
