Thanks for your wide selection of responses. No abrupt changes are
planned... but new ideas have a way of creeping in, once they're out in the
open.
Some names are withheld on responses sent to my personal address.
-rkm
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996
Sender: •••@••.••• (Barbara A. Pletz)
Subject: Lurker Response!
No, I feel what I've been getting is just fine and I enjoy the postings as
is. But I'm pretty agreeable with to whatever everybody else wants!
(Oh yes, I tend to be mostly interested in U.S. 1st Amend. issues --
particularly with K-12 students using the computers, use of home pages,
etc., as my dissertation may be on that topic.)
Best regards,
Barbara A. Pletz, Doctoral Student Edu. Policy & Ldshp. (Ed. Adm. & Law)
The Ohio State University E-Mail: •••@••.•••
"Whatever befalls the earth, befalls the children of the earth. We did not
weave the web of life, we are merely a strand in it. Whatever we do to the
web, we do to ourselves." (Chief Seattle)
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
From: <withheld>
Subject: a reply
One aspect of cyberjournal is its strong international orientation.
This is less of an interest to me, for while I appreciate that the
US cannot live in isolation from events abroad, some of the cyberjournal
discussions pertain to rights issues that are less glaring in the US.
...I do hope you can focus the cyberjournal enough so that it is
less overwhelming.
Regards,
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996
Sender: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: cj#454> CJ Feedback Needed! (esp. from LURKERS)
Greetings from a LURKER,
Although some of the items on CJ tend to be a little on the extreme side,
from where I stand, (please no flaming :) ) I for one do not read the list
until I have a block of time to devote to it. As a result I will sometimes
not read it at all for several days.
I would prefer to see one mailling per day, at most, with the articles
combined. It would be nice if the mailling also had a table of content. I
could then quickly select the items I am interested in. I also understand
that this will be more work for you. You could make exception for those
*hot* items. They would really stand out then.
Thanks for all the good work you do. I have enjoy CJ most of the time and
sometimes I am challenged by it.
Have Fun,
Frank Veenstra.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996
From: <withheld>
Subject: Re: cj#454> CJ Feedback Needed! (esp. from LURKERS)
Richard --
I greatly appreciate the current quality and volume of material from CJ,
including the occasional relief pieces from Marsha W etc.
I usually (but not always) read pieces as they arrive, but save some
pieces in a folder for later review. Keep up the great service. ...
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996
Sender: "elinor mosher" <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Answer to query
I'd like to see fewer messages; but some are so good on any one day
I'd rather read too much than miss them. Perhaps you could weed out
ones that are repetitions of other ones on that day's group.
Paradise, NS
B0S 1R0
Post proof that brotherhood is not so wild a dream
as those who profit by postponing it pretend. N. Corwin
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
From: <withheld>
Subject: Can we have a DIGEST version
hi there,
I'm enjoying most of the mail, (it's a bit verbose some times), but
anyway, my question or suggestion is if we could have an option
to set cj to digest version. that will help.
[See: cj#458> How to SET listserv paramaters]
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996
From: <withheld>
Subject: Re: cj#454> CJ Feedback Needed! (esp. from LURKERS)
I'm new to the list
I've been lurking, wondering whats been going on.
I've been hitting the delete button a lot lately. I'd like to
save and read all the articles since they all seem worthwhile but I don't
have the time.
I would suggest keeping up the quality and quantity but:
1: not combining articles in single posts.
2: giving a brief two or three line abstract of the longer posts.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996
Sender: "•••@••.•••" <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: cj#454> CJ Feedback Needed! (esp. from LURKERS)
The jokes are out of place.
valis
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996
Sender: William Loh Ne-Hooi <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: cj#454> CJ Feedback Needed! (esp. from LURKERS)
> o Would you like to see fewer pieces, selected for highest quality?
yes, I would please.
I feel that it should be more morderated.
'Nuff said.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996
Sender: •••@••.••• (Mats =?iso-8859-1?Q?Lundstr=F6m?= )
Subject: Re: cj#454> CJ Feedback Needed! (esp. from LURKERS)
> o Would you like to see fewer pieces, selected for highest quality?
When I compare to other mailinglists I have joined (and left) this list has
a quality. I don't read everything, but the articles I do read is quite
alright. Maybe they are too long.
> o Are there topics you'd like to see discussed?
I want to see more about Inet-related stuff. I'm not intrested in solutions
of the drug problem.
> o Do you have other gripes or suggestions you haven't expressed?
Nope
Cheers
//////////
Mats Lundstr=F6m
Editor of the mag InternetGuiden
Voice: 46 +8-674 63 73
=46ax 612 15 86
Epost: •••@••.•••
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996
Sender: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: cj#454> CJ Feedback Needed! (esp. from LURKERS)
Richard,
What's this slur on the 'lurkers',..'up the workers',
that's the way things are..hope you're not trying to change all that, ;],
I find it extremely useful,and informative..'a cool ocean breeze across a
desert of despair'..and would suggest that it continue just as it is,read it
all,print certain items for others,and have no complaint
whatsoever..hopefully that doesn't constitute a disappointment for you,
Regards,
Rob
[Hey! I didn't slur lurkers! Perhaps the term itself carries
connotations... but then cyber-terminology is formed by the heaviest
users... I never said I was pc! (;-) ]
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: 05 Feb 96
From: Robert Ward <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: cj#454> CJ Feedback Needed! (esp. from LURKERS)
Richard
I'd rate Cyberjournal as one of the more interesting reads on the Net. The
articles are judged nicely - long enough to be worth reading, short enough to
be readable on a PC, content sometimes with a touch of paranoia (but that
doesn't mean they're not out to get you ...) but usually thought-provoking. It's
good to get as many alternate views of what's going on in the world as possible
- who knows, some of them may even hit on the truth (whatever that may be).
Your specific q's:
No fewer, rate is about right. Quality - ditto. Fewer and heavier would make it
a bit turgid, as well as reducing the probability of postings actually getting
read.
Topics - well, they come up already. The big topic is of course whether and how
all this nettery makes any difference to the way the world works.
Gripes or suggestions - maybe theme topics better?
regards
Robert
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996
Sender: •••@••.••• (Joel Glad)
Subject: Re: cj#454> CJ Feedback Needed! (esp. from LURKERS)
As a LURKER, I am happy to offer a few opinions:
> o Would you like to see fewer pieces, selected for highest quality?
Most definitely, I seem to get less and less time to read mass emailings.
Perhaps if there were abstracts instead of full text versions available, we
could get to the information we wanted quicker.
> o Are there topics you'd like to see discussed?
I think the emphasis on our fragile freedom, and what is going on in global
communications legislation is worthy of continued inspection.
> o Do you have other gripes or suggestions you haven't expressed?
In wake of the recent telecomm *censorship* bill, perhaps an encrypted
version of CJ is warranted. I think the use of PGP or some other standard
encryption would suffice.
-Joel Glad
{
} } {
{ { } }
} }{ {
_{ }{ } }_
( }{ }{ { )
|""---------""| __ _ _ _ _ _
| /"" | / |_ | |_ / _ | / |
| _ | _| _/ |_ |_ |_. _/ |_ /-- |_/
| / | |
| |/ | Northwestern University Chicago
| / /
| / http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/1996/crafts.html
""---------""
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Posted by Richard K. Moore (•••@••.•••) Wexford, Ireland
•••@••.••• | Cyberlib=http://www.internet-eireann.ie/cyberlib
Materials may be reposted in their entirety for non-commercial use.
~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Share: