Re: Who's on FoRK. (Removing redundancies from dist-obj-nofork@cs)

Joseph R. Kiniry (
Tue, 17 Feb 1998 18:10:16 -0800

Ron Resnick writes:
> 1) Adam - Heeeeeey!! Wait a minute - just cuz I drop off fork for a
> little R&R, I get bumped to the back of the list? What's with that -
> don't I get my old spot back with Mark - ie down near #59? This is
> unfair - I demand dignified treatment as a veteran, harumph :-)

Hrm, well _I_ think that they should reference ex-FoRKers in
chronological order! I'd be in the first dozen or so!

> 2) So, let me get this straight - we are strictly barred from emailing
> directly to ask for help with our sick parakeets. But
> it's perfectly ok if I want to mail to for some
> communal group therapy for my sick parakeet Fifi, and TBL just becomes
> one of the fellas who suggests cold compresses and a vacation in
> tropical Tahiti? Wow, I've never mingled with royalty before (does
> Rohit count?) I'm getting all tingly :-). [Psst - remind me someone -
> which is the shrimp FoRK and which is the salad FoRK.]

Um, sick parakeet? Stick a fork it it, it's a bloody dead bird! It's

> I assume that real old timers like JoeB, Mark, Adam, DMZ, and Wayne
> are already accounted for in the dist-obj-nofork set.
> Summary: maintaining dist-obj-nofork is probably more hassle than it's
> worth.

Agreed. And, in truth, if folks post properly, sendmail will take
care of duplicates that actually are the same address. I.e. I'm
just about ready to kill dist-obj-nofork because (1) it's too much
hassle to maintain and (2) since FoRK is quite a bit smaller,
there should be a fork-nodist-obj@xent instead.

> Anybody got a problem with any of that? Speak now or forever hold
> your peace...
> ...
> Also, this is hardly a 'my dick is longer than your dick' competition.

Let's not go there.

> We're actively concerned about dist-obj growing beyond the point where
> it can no longer serve its original purpose, as a quiet, thoughtful,
> reflective place.

(In best Beevis imitation) - "Heehee, he said 'reflective'."

> We got so noisy in the last few days (no thanks to loudmouths like
> Adam and me - and Doug Lea) - that we're now dumping our garbage on
> FoRK's front lawn - let's see how they like it for a change :-).

We went from 1.1 msg/day average to almost 8! Let's hope it settles
down a bit.

On another note, I did a survey of the last few dozen posts to try
to determine why threading wasn't working as well as it might in
the dist-obj archive.

The two main things I learned:

(1) All broken threads thus far are caused by M$ products not
providing In-Reply-To: and References: headers and incorrectly
munging subject lines. <sigh>

(2) _A lot_ more people use VM/(X)Emacs than I had originally thought
for email. Of particular note are Doug Lea, Patrick Logan, Paul
Benninghoff, and myself. Those who use Netscrape seem to be using
version 4 which, in general, Does-The-Right-Thing. Somehow this is
both surprising and not surprising at the same time. I think we
can partially thank Dave M. for that.

On a related email-ish note, I just got mail from Ken Arnold
about COOTS and noticed that he uses CDE dtmail. Eeeek! Boy,
talk about a dyed-in-the-wool Sun-head!

> Ron


Joseph R. Kiniry       A1 F9 C5 8C B3 43 54 20 FA 20 63 80 53 C3 6D 85
California Institute of Technology           ID 78860581   ICQ 4344804