Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/06/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]This is exactly what I was saying. Thank you Mark. If the list toe'ed the mark, it would be dull, and after talking and re-talking and re-re-talking the same old stuff, many of us (me) would be gone. Or should we (the long time LUGgers) just hang around to answer and re-answer and re-re-answer the questions. That gets old... quick. By having subject diversions, a more rounded picture of the people we are conversing with, appears. We can see why some folks say what they do. A narrow minded approach simply won't work. Three forth of the LUG would be gone. There would be enormously long times with nothing to say. I've been on moderated lists. They are no fun. Someone is always breathing down your neck. "You copied too much from the previous post." "You can't talk about darkroom stuff on this list." "etc..." You have to look at this as a cyclic wave. The off topic excursions flow, then ebb. All by themselves. The flow begins when there is NO Leica chatter. And ebbs when the Leica chatter starts up again. Think of it as a filler that keep a lot of people hanging around. Jim Mark wrote... >I find that once in a while we all run out of Leica things to talk about >or Re talk about. It's nice when a new slant on looking at this whole >Leica issue comes up which is food for thought and conversation. I'm >always grateful and I've learned a lot here and passed off some >information & disinformation myself. >But nothing beats this great cerebral concept of "why you guys don't >live up to my expectations so I'm leaving" thread. It has given me a >whole new view of photography. Thanks you, naysayers for your generous >positive input. I'm going to go out and be a better, more to the point person. >Mark Rabiner >Does anyone really know what time it is? Does anyone really care? > Chicago? Roger wrote... >Sorry, Jim. This is one time I am not in league with you. These >folk have every right to complain about the S/N ratio. They, like >many others, thought they subscribed to a *dedicated* mailing list. >Bernard wrote: >> When I read this group actively about a year ago, I was almost >> intimidated by the collective knowledge and expertise. Now it's just >> like most any Usenet group; fun, but pretty worthless. No, I haven't >> done much to make it any better. In fact, if it hadn't degraded so >><snip> >> >> George Huczek wrote: >> >> > You know, I've been wading through reams of messages on this list over >><snip> >I find that once in a while we all run out of Leica things to talk about >or Re talk about. It's nice when a new slant on looking at this whole >Leica issue comes up which is food for thought and conversation. I'm >always grateful and I've learned a lot here and passed off some >information & disinformation myself. >But nothing beats this great cerebral concept of "why you guys don't >live up to my expectations so I'm leaving" thread. It has given me a >whole new view of photography. Thanks you, naysayers for your generous >positive input. I'm going to go out and be a better, more to the point person. >Mark Rabiner >Does anyone really know what time it is? Does anyone really care? > Chicago? >