Re: your mail
- From: Michael Hart <hart@[redacted]>
- Subject: Re: your mail
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 12:12:23 -0400 (EDT)
On Sun, 21 Oct 2001, Leslie Evans wrote:
> I was surprised at the flame letters I got from the venerable Michael
> Hart, and Michael Stutz. It what appeared to be a dry discussion over
> terminology (etext vs. ebook) we got a venting of considerable hostility
> toward commercial contemporary digital publications.
"Flame letters?"
I have seen more than enough flames on most lists concerning eBooks,
eTexts, etc. . .but hadn't seen any I would even remotely consider
flaming on this list or in this context.
All I saw was people stating their own preferences, not dogmatically
stomping out the opinions of others.
Michael
PS
However, I JUST now, this very minute, received at least TWO messages
from this list from Saturday. . .AFTER I received some from Sunday,
so it is possible that I haven't seen some flames that erupted since
the last [BP] emails I received.
[snipped the rest, as it deserves several separate replies]
[Moderator: We generally don't let through posts that are
primarily personal attacks or gratuitous provocations.
We will let through posts that are provocative on particular
*subjects* (as opposed to people) if they're on topics relevant
to the list and otherwise meet the list's posting standards.
(We will moderate more tightly threads that get repetitive or
off-track, so posters shouldn't count on getting in more than
one full-blown rant on a particular topic :-)
Comments on the way the list is run are welcome, but messages that
primarily concern themselves with that topic should go to the
moderator's admin. box, spok+bookpeople-request@[redacted] and
not to the list. "Metadiscussion" threads tend to get killed quickly
by the moderators. - JMO]