9 May
2012
9 May
'12
9:48 p.m.
I echo Bob's sentiment.
Laurie
West MI
--- On Wed, 5/9/12, Bob Green <bobgreen(a)swbell.net> wrote:
From: Bob Green <bobgreen(a)swbell.net>
Subject: Re: [Callers] New choreo list / traffic volume
To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Date: Wednesday, May 9, 2012, 4:16 PM
If we are going to post and vet new
dances, I am quite certain a separate
list would be preferable. Our little caller's group here in
Missouri would
alone double the word volume of the current list. While the
total volume
would be the same, I think there would be distinct
advantages to having the
dances presorted out from the other topics. I would most
certainly
subscribe to both lists if it were done.
Thanks for all you do Chris!
Bob
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Chris Weiler (home) <
chris.weiler(a)weirdtable.org>
wrote:
Hello SW callers,
I finally caught up on my e-mail and have read the
discussion about
starting a new choreography list. My thought is
that
most if not all
callers would want to be on both lists, so why
not have
them be the same
list? My only answer that I could think of why
not is
if the callers list
volume is getting too heavy for some people.
So I would like to know is if there are many people who
would _not_
subscribe to a choreography list?
Also, what do you think of the traffic volume lately?
If you think that
the volume is too heavy lately, would you rather
have
it divided into two
lists to increase the signal to noise ratio?
Thanks to everyone for your interest and participation,
even if it's just
lurking.
Chris Weiler
Your friendly neighborhood SharedWeight moderator.
Craftsbury, VT
______________________________**_________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/**mailman/listinfo/callers<http://www.shared…
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers