Re: Defending... PERTINENT TO GROUP? (fwd)

Elizabeth Vance (epoland@OSF1.GMU.EDU)
Tue, 13 Feb 1996 14:31:13 -0500

By what strict definition is a posting "necessary"? In Ruby's message,
there was a compliment (nice to see one on Anthro-L for a change), a
volunteered bit of information (what she's working on), and a comment.
I'd much rather see that than see someone's message criticized. Just
because a post isn't announcing a conference or looking for information
doesn't mean it's not welcome. By calling messages like this
unnecessary, or questioning its benefit, it discourages others from
posting. If we want to have a good discussion list where people can
feel free to volunteer comments, then maybe we should lighten up just a
little bit about what _is_ posted.

Elizabeth Vance
Posting unnecessarily, and proud of it.

Forwarded message:
> From: Daryl Barnett <dbarnett@CATS.UCSC.EDU>
> Just an example of an unnecessary public posting... Is this posting of any
> benefit to the entire group? At least now we all know what Dr. Rohrlich is
> working on. (No offense intended, but conscious use of bandwidth is
> reflective of our wise use of internet communication.)
> At 08:52 PM 2/12/96 -0500, you wrote:
> >I like the title very much, Bob and shall get hold of it. At this time,
> >I'm working on the biography of a woman the title of whose autobiography
> >is "In Praise of Imperfection." I sense a connection there with your
> >book. Ruby Rohrlich