Re: problem with ux400

[RWK@FUJI.ILA.Dialnet.Symbolics.COM (Robert W. Kerns)]

    Date: Fri, 29 Jun 90 10:00 EDT
    From: davel@whutt.att.com

    >  Date: Wed, 27 Jun 90 17:39 EDT
    >  From: RWK@FUJI.ILA.Dialnet.Symbolics.COM (Robert W. Kerns)
    >
    >    Date: Wed, 27 Jun 90 08:58 EDT
    >    From: Len Moskowitz <Len@HEART-OF-GOLD>
    >    I find it very helpful to see other's problem reports, if only for
    >    information purposes.  If someone wants to respond, great.  If not the
    >    only thing lost is net bandwidth.  I'd like to see all problem reports
    >    copied to SLUG.
    >
    >  No!  You'll also lose at least *THIS* reader.  I don't have time to
    >  wade through that much mail, and it's only fair that Symbolics be
    >  asked to make an initial try before inflicting the problems on such
    >  volunteers as Barmar & myself.  I suspect that Barry is probably
    >  near the limit of the time he's willing to spend answering Slug mail,
    >  so it's not like you're going to get more answers, either.
    >
    You really aren't required to answer SLUG bug reports, you know. 8^)
    It's nice that you and Barry volunteer your time to help out the rest
    of us, but you shouldn't feel that you have to respond to every request
    for help.

Respond, nothing, I'm talking about even *READING*.  I respond to
only a minute fraction; even Barmar responds to only a minute fraction.
I haven't asked him, but frankly, I find it hard to imagine that Barmar
or *ANYBODY* not paid to do exactly that would read all of the bug mail
that that would be sent to SLUG if they *ALL* went to SLUG.

If everybody sent all of their bugs to the SLUG mailing list, I would
remove myself and respond to *NONE* of them.  I would also regret losing
this source of information.  Maybe then some of us could go start a
NON-BUG-SLUG list somewhere, but I know I couldn't handle the maintenance
of such a list.