Then why the decision?

Carole

-----Original Message-----
From: janet paterson <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: St. Patrick's Day slip


>i thought barb said that nothing we have done
>has caused u of t's decision
>
>janet
>
>At 18:00 2002/03/19 -0800, Carole K. Menser wrote:
>>There is a point in Katie's message.  If volume is a problem and slows
down
>>the host's system, perhaps we should all consider what we send through the
>>list and what we send to individuals privately.  At least for the future.
>>
>>Carole Menser
>>PWP Ted (54/46/40)
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Janice Morgan <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>>Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 7:20 AM
>>Subject: Re: St. Patrick's Day slip
>>
>>
>>>don't you have better thing to do than to tell people where they goofed
you
>>>sound like a very unhappy person. I guess this should not be on the list
>>>also, put a smile on your face and just enjoy the list ok.
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 3:07 PM
>>>Subject: St. Patrick's Day slip
>>>
>>>
>>>Edith,
>>>
>>>       Thank you for your St. Patrick's Day message, and for your
>>subsequent
>>>posting, sent directly to me, where you have realized, after the fact,
that
>>>your heartfelt St. Patrick's Day message did violate the list guidelines.
>>>It
>>>is very easy to break the guidelines because we want personal contact and
>>we
>>>want to be a family.  Many of us do not even know the quidelines are
there,
>>>and many of us forget about those stuffy, legalistic guidelines.
>>>
>>>       Look at all the traffic on this list today,  and the number of
>>>postings on the list, not just your posting, which technically or
directly
>>>violate the
>>>guidelines. And this happens every day. A percentage of people on the
list
>>>has always favored listing everything and using the delete button whereas
a
>>>percentage, which includes me (a legally trained person) has always
favored
>>>compliance with the guidelines. I tried to alert people to the problem
that
>>>if, we were slowing down the UT system, our volume was too big, e.g.
>>>non-compliance with the
>>>guidelines was a problem. If our postings are monitored by the UT or
>>>elsewhere, how can that academic institution justify providing services
for
>>>personal messages, poetry, humor pieces/jokes, etc?  I assume that
Barbara
>>P
>>>convinced UT to accept UT as an information exchange system and not a
chat
>>>room. Any new place will check with UT, and even the "slowness" factor,
>>>without any indication of concern about list content, will be a problem.
I
>>>also assume that the UT has had rumblings about withdrawing services for
>>>some
>>>time, and those rumblings were ignored and/or the options at UT, and
>>>possiblity of the options of the list continuing to stay there, have not
>>>been
>>>fully explored.  I would like to know if the withdrawal of services by
the
>>>UT
>>>is a done deal; even if UT thinks it's a done deal there are things we
can
>>>do
>>>to make it not a done deal.  We should, at a minimum, be able to stay
with
>>>UT
>>>until we find a replacement host.
>>>
>>>        I was surprised by your posting, but I do think that St.
Patrick's
>>>Day ought to be celebrated and that the guidelines can be bent, or
ignored,
>>>at times. However, we are in a real mess, and I think that the list is in
>>>real danger. It will take a long time to get something set up at a new
>>>place, even if everything goes well, and any experience we have had with
UT
>>>will impact upon negotiations with any potential host for the list.  I
hope
>>>list members become very careful about their postings in this interim
>>period
>>>before we find a new home: this can be helpful in convincing UT to keep
us
>>>as
>>>well as convincing a new university to take us.  What I said about the
>>>guidelines before on this list was an interesting, legal-like argument to
>>>me,
>>>but probably not interesting to anyone else on the list, but now concern
>>>with
>>>the list guidelines and careful compliance with the guidelines may be the
>>>survival of this list and its family.
>>>
>>>       Edith, your St. Patrick's Day message was an unintentional slip.
I
>>>am
>>>certain we all loved receiving and reading it.  Happy St. Patrick's Day
to
>>>you!  Katie
>>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
>>mailto:[log in to unmask]
>>>In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
>>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
>>mailto:[log in to unmask]
>>>In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
>>>
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
mailto:[log in to unmask]
>>In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
>>
>janet paterson: an akinetic rigid subtype, albeit perky, parky
>pd: 55/41/37 cd: 55/44/43 tel: 613 256 8340 email: [log in to unmask]
>smail: 375 Country Street, Almonte, Ontario, Canada, K0A 1A0
>a new voice: http://www.geocities.com/janet313/
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
mailto:[log in to unmask]
>In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn