Doug Ewell wrote:

>
>
> > Doug - it is never less work to tell someone to google a term then it
> > is to define it. That Peter is just being stubborn is why I moved this
> > to an off-topic thread.
>
> It would have been a lot less work for everyone involved, including
> those of us reading it.

Well, yeah, in retrospect I agree, but I bet Peter is the only one out
of that group that wouldn't bother to google a term, even at this point.

Don't worry, I won't bother again to explain a term to Peter.

>
> I get the digest. I have to "read" everything, even if just skimming it
> to see if I care. Subject lines aren't much help, since they are often
> not updated when the topics drifts (which is true of most mailing
> lists).

Sorry about that then...that was why I moved the subject line of this
thread - and it has stayed off topic or I would have moved it again :)

>
> This list has become even more mean-spirited than before. More than
> ever, the preferred topics are not writing systems, but other people's
> stupidity, other people's laziness, and other people's stubbornness.
> Maybe I should have unsubscribed last month while I was thinking about
> it. Maybe now would be a good time.

Since my original question was about why the list was split, and the
moderator seems to have split too, I have been thinking to recreate the
list on my own, with the intent of enforcing a no "mean spirited" rule.
I agree there is way too much nonsense as it stands now.

I spend enough time in front of the computer that I could probably put
the list on moderate for a while while things settle in without a great
burden on message delay or me in approving messages. I don't want to
edit any messages, but I could head off any trouble at the pass by
sending messages back to the author, or not approving them. Maybe others
could help moderate too.

This is not an ideal solution, but it is a practical one.

What do people think?

Best,

Barry