On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 04:18:16PM -0800, Philip Hart <philiph at SLAC.Stanford.EDU> wrote: > On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, Matthew Hunter wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 02:04:41PM -0800, Philip Hart <philiph at SLAC.Stanford.EDU> wrote: > > > On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, Matthew Hunter wrote: > > > > Didn't we just go over this? > > > I think you're risking an inquiry after the health of your tapeworm here. > > Not at all. "We" is the collective list body in this case. > I must have missed the arrival at a consensus because I was busy deleting > Monty Python and beer posts along with a certain amount of flirting. 38 posts in Mia's accidental thread, not one in favor... I'd say that's a consensus, whether formally decreed or not. > > As I've noted in the past, a separate list for off-topic > > discussions spawned from the original list manages to obtain the > > best of both worlds. I'd be glad to set one up if there's > > interest, as I have done so for other similar lists. > This noting must have been before my time - was a consensus reached? > Presumably for no second list and a low signal-to-noise here? It was discussed briefly after list formation, and resulted in the formation of a couple sub-lists for major topics. -- Matthew Hunter (matthew at infodancer.org) Public Key: http://matthew.infodancer.org/public_key.txt Homepage: http://matthew.infodancer.org/index.jsp Politics: http://www.triggerfinger.org/index.jsp