Re: [Leica] friday guideline/rule?

["Bryan Caldwell" <bcaldwell@softcom.net>]

>>>I would like to add a thought that perhaps an easier rule than "no
dealers" or
"post on Friday" might be "no more than 1 post per week per member" with "no
more than x number of items."<<<

Once these kind of regulations start, they won't stop. What purpose does it
serve. I just don't understand why people can't skip over posts that they
don't want to read rather than impose regulations.

I can understand that it was not the purpose of this group to become a
billboard for high volume dealers who do not otherwise participate in the
day-to-day activities of the LUG. But I don't think that this has ever been
a problem. If I'm wrong, someone please correct me. If we had a situation
where major dealers that no one knew were posting pages and pages of
inventory lists things would be different - but they're not.

The function of a list like this is that it facillitates communication
between people who have a common interest in Leica cameras. That doesn't
mean that we're all interested in all the resulting posts. I'm an M user and
really not interested in any of the R discussions. I'm not proposing that we
split into two lists or alternate days or anything else. If I see an R post
I generally skim it quickly or just skip over it. My personal interests
should not dictate the composition of the LUG.

Once restrictions like the one proposed above are in place, the free
exercise of information on this list will have been curtailed. Next, someone
will propose only x postings per week that don't contain the word "Leica."
Or, only x number of postings per week that mention Ted's underwear! We'll
have "approved" topics and "forbidden" topics. Then the LUG really will be
in danger of falling apart. Limiting or restricting "for sale" postings at
the level they occur here is no different than limiting or restricting any
other kind of posting.  We all enjoy Leicas and, I assume, we all like to
keep an eye open for good deals as well as keeping an eye on market forces.
When we sell things, we like to offer them first to those we know will
appreciate them. By imposing regulations seemingly for their own sake, we
deny ourselves these opportunities for no reason.

If you have something photographic to sell, post it on the LUG. I'll thank
you for the opportunity it gives me.

Bryan
- -----Original Message-----
From: Photovilla@aol.com <Photovilla@aol.com>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 9:55 PM
Subject: [Leica] friday guideline/rule?


><<These lists of
>
>equipment and commercial people should use Friday. Period. This M6 HM TTL,
>
>from the looks of it, is a commercial AD. It should have been posted on
>
>Friday. If occasional a LUGger decides to trade-in an item, or advertise on
>
>e-bay, or whatever, I, for one, would like to have a crack at buying it
>
>before it's given to the masses. Which means the occasional mid-week
message.
>
>>>
>
>
>You are right that this was a "commercial" ad and I do sell enough
equipment
>to be considered a "dealer." This has been quite a natural progression of
the
>Leica collecting mania! <g>
>
>I have been reading this list for a few years and if I remember correctly
>several members of the list came up with the "Friday for sale" idea. Before
>that ads were posted irregularly, but with less volume.
>
>I didn't realize that "fridays" had become a "rule" since then. I would not
>have posted this here on a Tuesday if I thought I was violating the LUG
>"charter."  Is there a charter somewhere that we can read?
>
>The reason I posted it here first is that I only have one M6HM TTL and the
>last one I received was sold before the LUG had a chance at it. I had to
>inform two interested parties that it was sold. I thought the list might
>appreciate "first shot" at it.
>
>Rather than contributing to controversy I will post on Fridays only from
now
>on.
>
>I would like to add a thought that perhaps an easier rule than "no dealers"
or
>"post on Friday" might be "no more than 1 post per week per member" with
"no
>more than x number of items."
>
>This would put an end to the time zone problem as well as protect the list
>from becoming an endless stream of spam. It seems to work for the LHSA in
>their Viewfinder publication (2 pg. max) and it requires less "Internet
>police" to enforce.
>
>Just my thoughts...back to the races!
>
>later,
>Rich