[syndicate] Re: yes, but is it art

[self re:ply.cator]

At 03:53 PM 3/10/2002 +0100, you wrote:

>well, in a way the piece that mez sent was highlighting this aspect of 
>course and I took it as such
>but somehow sending it on syndicate as well as the countless other mailing 
>lists it was sent to was a total misunderstanding of the syndicate mailing 
>list

..f, how is this article _a total misunderstanding of the syndicate mailing 
list_? how does the list function according 2 u?  wot r its aims, etc?

i c this article as particularly relevant here, s.pecially given the 
spectre spilt & the rapid negative perception of NN postings.........these 
r the actions that make up the communal function u r so keen 2 project.


>which is way beyond that basic thinking;

i don't understand this...wot basic thinking?

>cross posting is clearly at fault here. I believe that _here this post 
>reads as an advertisement.

ok, & that's yr right 2 think this. [i obviously don't]. is it yr right 2 
then state that the syndicate community|mailing list also holds 2 this 
view, & that each member is b.ing damaged by this x.posure? isn't it a bit 
g][m][od][erator][-like 2 assume as much? y not _ask_ the members wot they 
think? or better yet, let them x.punge as they will.........


>>will continue your work. We can document and archive the
>>banning on the syndicate list [exchange of emails,
>>opinions] if you like to do that.
>
>which I heartily support (if anybody out there was wondering)
>
>f.
>

y fred? y do u support this?

x.p][l][unging,
mez





.           .    ....         .....
  net.wurker][mez][
[trans. loose. (e)NT][ity][]
[sel][l][f  reply.cation]

{

www.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/
  www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker
.... .               .???  .......