randy@mapsurfer.com writes:
> it is cool to develop locally, but I would hope clues
> always percolate up to a national forum.
davisarc@wcvt.com writes:
> While I hope that smaller
> localized lists won't dilute the energy of the larger (goegraphically)
> list we have now
I definitely agree with the above sentiments. Let me specify that my
suggestion of creating 50 miniature mailing lists (one for each state) would
be ONLY for the purpose of allowing potential hobbyists to contact experienced
letterboxers in their area. After making initial contact, newcomers should be
directed to our main list. I wouldn't even recommend that we publish the
instructions for joining the smaller lists. When someone expresses interest
in being a contact person for their state, we will just add them to the
recipient list for that group. Newcomers would not actually join the state
contact mailing list, they would only be sending a message to it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
local vs. national
4 messages in this thread |
Started on 1999-02-03
[L-USA] local vs. national
From: (Letterboxr@aol.com) |
Date: 1999-02-03 02:19:30 UTC-05:00
[L-USA] Re: local vs. national
From: Thom Cheney (tcgrafx@imagina.com) |
Date: 1999-02-03 08:07:09 UTC-08:00
Letterboxr@aol.com wrote:
> Let me specify that my
> suggestion of creating 50 miniature mailing lists (one for each state) would
> be ONLY for the purpose of allowing potential hobbyists to contact experienced
> letterboxers in their area.
Good... I reserve the right to add my .02 no matter where the question
comes from. I'm a little uneasy with adding another layer of
letterboxing bureaucracy. What is wrong with just listing those who
want to be contacted in a particular state?
--
Thom Cheney
President Emeritus SOUL
(Society Of Uncluttered Letterboxers)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
> Let me specify that my
> suggestion of creating 50 miniature mailing lists (one for each state) would
> be ONLY for the purpose of allowing potential hobbyists to contact experienced
> letterboxers in their area.
Good... I reserve the right to add my .02 no matter where the question
comes from. I'm a little uneasy with adding another layer of
letterboxing bureaucracy. What is wrong with just listing those who
want to be contacted in a particular state?
--
Thom Cheney
President Emeritus SOUL
(Society Of Uncluttered Letterboxers)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
[L-USA] Re: local vs. national
From: Klink, Mitchel (Mitchel.Klink@sulzerpumps.com) |
Date: 1999-02-03 16:44:33 UTC-08:00
Thom Cheney writes:
<< What is wrong with just listing those who
want to be contacted in a particular state? >>
I think that is essentially what we are proposing, but with some minor
cosmetic adjustments. My justification for doing it as proposed follows:
1) Conformity. We already have the State Contacts map on the website.
People are used to it. It looks nice. It fits our map-related theme. Most
people seem to like it.
2) User Friendly. Providing a list address, rather than providing a page
full of individual addresses, makes it very easy for a newcomer to make
contact. They just click on their home state. An email form pops up, and
they type their message. They only have to send this ONE SINGLE MESSAGE to
contact everyone in that state that has volunteered to help welcome
newcomers and get them started.
3) Security. If you have ever checked out our online archive, you will see
that our email addresses are disguised. Most of you are by now aware that
there are automatic ''spam-bots" out there that endlessly search the
internet for valid email addresses to send junk mail to. By putting a
mailing list address on the webpage instead of our actual personal email
addresses, we can help prevent ourselves from becoming targets for
unsolicited commercial junk mail.
For the sake of clarification, let me explain how these smaller state lists
would work. As you all know, the main Letterbox USA talk list (the one that
this message is being posted to) is configured so that when you reply to a
message, your reply is automatically sent to the entire group. This is NOT
how the smaller lists would be set up, since they would be intended for
one-time initial contact only.
Let's say Thom and I are on the list as contact people for Oregon. A
newcomer sends a message to that list. Thom and I will both recieve the
message. When Thom hits his REPLY button, by default his reply will ONLY be
sent to the newcomer. It will not be sent to the list and forwarded to me
or any other members. It will not be archived.
If the newcomer in turn responds to Thom's reply, again the message will go
to Thom ONLY. Except for the initial contact request from the newcomer, all
other messages associated with this process will be PRIVATE conversations.
Also, the newcomer will not be added to the list. Later, once he becomes
experienced, he can request to be added as a contact person, but this is not
required or automatic... it would be by special request only. In other
words, what I am proposing is a ONE-WAY mailing list that could not possibly
function as a localized replacement for our main Letterbox USA talk list.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
<< What is wrong with just listing those who
want to be contacted in a particular state? >>
I think that is essentially what we are proposing, but with some minor
cosmetic adjustments. My justification for doing it as proposed follows:
1) Conformity. We already have the State Contacts map on the website.
People are used to it. It looks nice. It fits our map-related theme. Most
people seem to like it.
2) User Friendly. Providing a list address, rather than providing a page
full of individual addresses, makes it very easy for a newcomer to make
contact. They just click on their home state. An email form pops up, and
they type their message. They only have to send this ONE SINGLE MESSAGE to
contact everyone in that state that has volunteered to help welcome
newcomers and get them started.
3) Security. If you have ever checked out our online archive, you will see
that our email addresses are disguised. Most of you are by now aware that
there are automatic ''spam-bots" out there that endlessly search the
internet for valid email addresses to send junk mail to. By putting a
mailing list address on the webpage instead of our actual personal email
addresses, we can help prevent ourselves from becoming targets for
unsolicited commercial junk mail.
For the sake of clarification, let me explain how these smaller state lists
would work. As you all know, the main Letterbox USA talk list (the one that
this message is being posted to) is configured so that when you reply to a
message, your reply is automatically sent to the entire group. This is NOT
how the smaller lists would be set up, since they would be intended for
one-time initial contact only.
Let's say Thom and I are on the list as contact people for Oregon. A
newcomer sends a message to that list. Thom and I will both recieve the
message. When Thom hits his REPLY button, by default his reply will ONLY be
sent to the newcomer. It will not be sent to the list and forwarded to me
or any other members. It will not be archived.
If the newcomer in turn responds to Thom's reply, again the message will go
to Thom ONLY. Except for the initial contact request from the newcomer, all
other messages associated with this process will be PRIVATE conversations.
Also, the newcomer will not be added to the list. Later, once he becomes
experienced, he can request to be added as a contact person, but this is not
required or automatic... it would be by special request only. In other
words, what I am proposing is a ONE-WAY mailing list that could not possibly
function as a localized replacement for our main Letterbox USA talk list.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
[L-USA] Re: local vs. national
From: Thom Cheney (tcgrafx@imagina.com) |
Date: 1999-02-04 08:28:31 UTC-08:00
Klink, Mitchel wrote:
>
>what I am proposing is a ONE-WAY mailing list that could not possibly
> function as a localized replacement for our main Letterbox USA talk
> list.
It all sounds very nice.... I can see the benefits, but it still seems
like adding another layer to me. Do what you will... my remarks are
inconsequential except to my own way of thinking. In the long run, it
will not affect my letterboxing habits, so you have my full support.
--
Thom Cheney
The Amish letterboxer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
>
>what I am proposing is a ONE-WAY mailing list that could not possibly
> function as a localized replacement for our main Letterbox USA talk
> list.
It all sounds very nice.... I can see the benefits, but it still seems
like adding another layer to me. Do what you will... my remarks are
inconsequential except to my own way of thinking. In the long run, it
will not affect my letterboxing habits, so you have my full support.
--
Thom Cheney
The Amish letterboxer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com