[lit-ideas] Re: "No offence meant", "None taken": the implicature

  • From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 07:01:13 -0700

I fail to see the problem here.  The technology of any modern email utility
allows you to have J. L. Esperanza's posts sent directly to your junk mail
folder.  You don't  have to look at his posts.  You can even empty your
junk-mail folder without checking to see what's in it.   J.L.  For you  who
wish J.L.'s posts to disappear, they will - and they could have all along
-without your having to go off in a huff or get the list administrator to
antagonize poor old J.L. and perhaps ruin him for the rest of us.   

 

 

Lawrence

 

 

 

 

 

From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Julie Krueger
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 6:32 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: "No offence meant", "None taken": the implicature

 

I second that emotion.  Sure, I don't have time to mess with hundreds of
posts from dozens of list-serves a day.  But the "delete" key is only a
finger away.  If I were put-out by JL's number of posts I would either
filter him or simply delete them.  As is, he is way over my head much of the
time.  I skim the posts, read if I'm interested, don't read if I'm not.
Neither the list-serve nor JL is forcing me to look at an e-mail which
appears in my in-box with his sender name. 

I'm wondering if this issue comes down to the use of bandwidth time for
people who pay by the hour or minute for internet access?  Since I do a
flat-rate monthly unlimited access thing, it isn't an concern for me, but I
can understand how it could be to someone punching the clock on download
time. 

Julie Krueger

On 10/26/07, Mike Geary <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> you gotta stop with the multiple postings per day.

 

Why????????????   I don't understand.  Who is forced to read his posts?  Is
there a per post charge by the list-serv?  Who is being put out by this?  I
find almost all of JL's posts witty and enlightening and charming.  When he
first started posting back on Phil-Lit people complained and whined about
the length of his posts.  That was quite a while ago.  Now he's more
judicious in the longevity of his posts.  But now people complain about his
frequency.  I think people are just envious of his breath of scope.  I only
envy his free time, as we all must, but why would you or anyone want to
impose limits?  If he has the time and energy and knowledge, more power to
him.  He has brought new life to a dying list.  I don't understand nor will
I ever accept any limits on the freedom to post unless you can show some
harm to the community of posters besides their envy.

 

Mike Geary

Memphis

 

 

 

 

 

 

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Andreas Ramos" < <mailto:andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx> andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx >

To: < <mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >

Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 8:34 PM

Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: "No offence meant", "None taken": the implicature

 

> 
> people are emailing me and asking me to talk with you.
> 
> one has unsubcribed due to your excessive number of emails.
> 
> either 5 per day max, or i put you on review, which means your emails go
to 
> me for personal approval.
> 
> yrs,
> andreas
>  <http://www.andreas.com> www.andreas.com
>

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 10-2007