Date:         Fri, 19 Dec 2008 16:37:33 -0500
Reply-To:     dvdclarksn@AOL.COM
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         David Clarkson <dvdclarksn@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Why to send all to the archives?
Comments: To: thewestyman@GMAIL.COM
In-Reply-To:  <D2F3075A7C7645DEB6C2BDE0CB640408@ZoltanPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

I'm not sure that all goes to the archives but if not then someone
(i.e. the moderator) has to delete or trim all postings so that
appropriate material can be archived. Editing of sorts I suppose.

-----Original Message-----
From: Zoltan <thewestyman@GMAIL.COM>
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Sent: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 2:36 pm
Subject: Why to send all to the archives?

I am surprised to read that all postings go to the archives.  Now,
that's a good reason why me or a lot of others are not using it, I
guess.  90% of the stuff there is not related to the posting, only the
subject line is.
I thought, only the relevant and worthwhile postings make it to the
archives, not every crap.
Personally, I delete most of the postings, except a few that is worth
reading.  Takes only a minute.  I am not even bothered by the off topic
stuff very much.  They come and go.
But to put all the junk into the archives, IMO, is not only a waste of
space but stupid.
I thought, there are some guys who take care of that.
Was I wrong?

Zoltan