Date:         Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:49:28 -0800
Reply-To:     mike miller <mwmiller@CWNET.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         mike miller <mwmiller@CWNET.COM>
Subject:      Re: non-Vanagon suggestion
Comments: To: Bill Davidson <wdavidson@THEGRID.NET>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Is it possible to edit the archives?


----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Davidson <wdavidson@THEGRID.NET>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 7:16 PM
Subject: non-Vanagon suggestion


> Some people feel strongly that there should be no non-Vanagon content on
the
> Vanagon list.
>
> Some people feel strongly that there should be non-Vanagon content.
> (even though the format has been Vanagon content only for the past several
> years).
>
> Suggestion:
>
> Two lists. One Vanagon content only. The other *anything but* Vanagon
> content.
>
> The people that want Vanagon only content would stay subscribed to the
> Vanagon list.... no changes necessary.
>
> The people that want to have non-Vanagon content can subscribe to the new
> list and stay subscribed to the Vanagon list... they would get it all.
>
> Advantages:
>
> This would save lots of room in the Vanagon archives.
>
> This would save people time when searching (and reading) the archives.
>
> The people that don't want the 20 to 40 non-Vanagon posts that arrive on
> many days would not get it. (and we might have fewer people leaving the
list
> due to being overwhelmed with email)
>
> The people that want both Vanagon and non-Vanagon posts would get it.
>
> The people that want both, but sometimes get busy and can't handle it all
> can sign off of the non-Vanagon list until they have more time.
>
> Everyone gets what they want.... when they want it.
>
> That's my idea.
>
> Bill Davidson
>