RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Regarding the controversy
Posted by
Tim Goldstein
on 2000-08-23 18:55:48 UTC
Mariss,
I would ask that you please do not remove the manual. You asked politely,
the list mom said OK and of the members that have expressed an opinion it
seems most are in support of this type of posting and files. Also remember
that there are about 695 people on this list that are so little concerned
they have said nothing about it.
Point is, a few people have questioned it and most have support it, I
personally will feel offended if this list restricts my ability to learn
about things related to the hobby based upon the input of just a few people.
Over the history of this list we have had a number of people that think a
subject is too specialized and should be removed from the list, and others
that think posting about selling anything is inappropriate. Bill has been
very level headed on all these things and taken the long term perspective.
Hot topics die off and people seeing things have not used the list as their
primary promotional method and as a couple of weeks pass everything settles
down to life as usual on CAD_CAM. You have become a great resource and
should not feel forced into retracting what has been done.
Tim
[Denver, CO]
P.S. I am dieing to see the addendum on the pulse multiplier!!
I would ask that you please do not remove the manual. You asked politely,
the list mom said OK and of the members that have expressed an opinion it
seems most are in support of this type of posting and files. Also remember
that there are about 695 people on this list that are so little concerned
they have said nothing about it.
Point is, a few people have questioned it and most have support it, I
personally will feel offended if this list restricts my ability to learn
about things related to the hobby based upon the input of just a few people.
Over the history of this list we have had a number of people that think a
subject is too specialized and should be removed from the list, and others
that think posting about selling anything is inappropriate. Bill has been
very level headed on all these things and taken the long term perspective.
Hot topics die off and people seeing things have not used the list as their
primary promotional method and as a couple of weeks pass everything settles
down to life as usual on CAD_CAM. You have become a great resource and
should not feel forced into retracting what has been done.
Tim
[Denver, CO]
P.S. I am dieing to see the addendum on the pulse multiplier!!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mariss Freimanis [mailto:geckohall@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 7:00 PM
> To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com
> Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Regarding the controversy
>
>
> --- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com, ptengin@a... wrote:
> > In a message dated 08/23/2000 2:51:23 AM Hawaiian Standard Time,
> > ginger@s... writes:
> >
> > << I am misisng something here- isnt this exactly what we have with
> > egroups? A free service, a place to post files that members can
> share,
> > a way to discuss those files. Why use anything else?
> >
> > >>
> > Ron,
> >
> > I believe the reason for restricting attachments to posts was to
> reduce the
> > groups "liability" in case of virus infections etc. I think the
> files being
> > dropped into the file area are restricted by our "group charter". I
> > personally have no problem with it, however, I will go around
> obstructions in
> > the road to get somewhere. How and where do you draw the line at
> what is Spam
> > or other undesirable posts? I just suggested a way to get around
> the
> > objections some may raise. We don't need to step on toes no matter
> how
> > trivial if there are easy ways around it....
> >
> > Peter
> > THRD, Inc.
>
> Hi,
>
> I apologize for the controversy this is causing. I will remove the
> manual, delete any reference to my company and repost it if I have
> the time tonite. Tomorrow at 6AM my family and I are off to Kauai
> till Sept 5 and I am very pressed for time.
>
> I simply posted the manual as a service for those that were
> interested in the continuing development of this drive. I felt uneasy
> about doing so for fear the purpose would be misconstrued.
>
> I have an addendum to the manual covering the pulse multiplier. I got
> the boards in today and got the first one going, but removing the
> manual and editing it has precedence.
>
> Mariss
Discussion Thread
mgrady
2000-08-22 22:59:27 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] commercialization of the list?
wanliker@a...
2000-08-22 23:54:33 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] commercialization of the list?
Ron Ginger
2000-08-23 05:49:27 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] commercialization of the list?
Ron Ginger
2000-08-23 06:19:57 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] commercialization of the list?
Art Fenerty
2000-08-23 08:08:08 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] commercialization of the list?
Tim Goldstein
2000-08-23 09:06:25 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] commercialization of the list?
ptengin@a...
2000-08-23 16:35:39 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] commercialization of the list?
Mariss Freimanis
2000-08-23 18:00:15 UTC
Regarding the controversy
Tim Goldstein
2000-08-23 18:08:33 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] commercialization of the list?
Tim Goldstein
2000-08-23 18:55:48 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Regarding the controversy
diazden
2000-08-23 20:43:56 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Regarding the controversy
wanliker@a...
2000-08-23 21:25:54 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Regarding the controversy
hans
2000-08-23 21:30:35 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Regarding the controversy
James Cullins
2000-08-23 21:44:34 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Regarding the controversy
Mariss Freimanis
2000-08-23 22:21:43 UTC
Re: Regarding the controversy
John Craddock
2000-08-23 22:45:44 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Regarding the controversy
ballendo@y...
2000-08-24 00:30:27 UTC
Re: Regarding the controversy