I was delighted to read Jeana Batrlett's introductory letter. I have been
to her web address and really enjoyed the wealth of information she has
included there. I for one look forward to any information she might like
to post to this list. (One small thing, I don't know if anyone else had
trouble reading the font size in the body of her letter, but I did.)
However, I was saddened to read Glenn Jordan's wish to leave the list due
to the excessive number, and nature of, postings. I am going to e-mail
Glenn directly and asked him to reconsider.
Although there was some vitriolic response to my letter of Aug 25 I was
heartened by the encouraging off-line responses I got - my thanks to you.
It was not a hastily sent off angry response. I had been considering such
a letter for some months. I temporarily went off the list for the month of
July while we took our family to ... the USA!!
It was when I re-subscribed after I got back that I noticed the huge volume
of mail, and the large numbers of unnecessary letters. My letter actually
took me 4 hours to compose. I never considered myself in a role of
"Official List Police", and I hope not many others of you saw me that way.
They were just what I considered to be sensible, helpful suggestions, to
keep the list relevant to as many as possible.
I feel that there has been a noticeable reduction in the volume of 'junk'
mail since then. I fear, however, that some have misunderstood my
guidelines for 'junk' mail, so I will summarise them:
- letters that have misleading subject headings,
- very short "thank you" or "thany you for thanking me"
letters, - letters with no subject heading,
- letters that treat the list as a means of "chat".
Barb Patterson wrote Aug 22:>I am asking you all to exercise a bit of
restraint about posting messages. Once again, the parkinsn list was shut
down because we had exceeded our quota of messages. There are probably
discussion lists, bulletin boards and chat rooms... On this list, the only
enemy is Parkinson's. Our members from all over the world battle
Parkinson's each and every day. In this respect, we are all united.>
I never suggested, or intended to suggest, that "HUMOUR" or "NON PD" should
be excluded from the list - only that it be APPROPRIATELY IDENTIFIED. I
have a separate folder for humour, and if I don't get time to read it while
I am "doing my mail" I simply transfer it to that folder and go back to it
later. If I haven't got time for "NON PD" mail I simply delete it.
I think accurate labelling is the key to effective communication, and it is
the least we can do with our letters to show respect for each other. It
would be so helpful if we could review our letters AFTER we have written
them and put in a "Subject" that actually guides others as to the content
that follows.
Regards - Christine 47/4
