[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

NOT about: Re: problem with ux400

To: davel%whutt.att.com@RIVERSIDE.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM
Subject: NOT about: Re: problem with ux400
From: gooch@TIJERAS.SW-SW.Dialnet.Symbolics.COM (William D. Gooch)
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 1990 13:33:00 -0400
Cc: SLUG%Warbucks.AI.SRI.COM@RIVERSIDE.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM
Character-type-mappings: (1 0 (NIL 0) (NIL :BOLD NIL) "CPTFONTCB")
Fonts: CPTFONT, CPTFONTCB
In-reply-to: The message of 29 Jun 90 09:00 CDT from davel@whutt.att.com

Some of you people are missing an important point: not everyone who participates on the SLUG
list has free access to the internet.  I pay phone bills for the time I spend connected to
Riverside when I initiate the connection.  Symbolics pays the phone bills when I don't.
Increasing the volume of mail on this list beyond some unknown limit may lead to (1) Symbolics
deciding to reduce their non-essential overhead by cutting off the free Dialnet phone service
they currently provide, followed by (2) people like me, the number of whom is growing, being
forced off the list due to unacceptable costs.

I say again: 1create another mailing list0 if you like, but please don't clutter this list and
dilute its purpose by sending large numbers of bug reports to it.  I already find that bug
reports sent to the list are predominantly a distraction, since for the most part they're
irrelevant to my situation and I rarely have the luxury of spare time to respond to them.

Prev by Date: Copy Bug Reports to SLUG? (was Re: problem with ux400)
Next by Date: SCL condition system
Previous by thread: Copy Bug Reports to SLUG? (was Re: problem with ux400)
Next by thread: Nothing to do with Symbolics: mailer problem
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread