thanks, but I am confused.
Peter said the list was dead in response to the comment about the delivery lag.

Just by the way, the lag is a problem that several mail services are experiencing allegedly due to virus intensity.

Since Peter was commenting about the already discussed lag, I thought he was saying the list is dead, so the lag didn't matter.
This is as opposed to saying perhaps the lag killed the list activity.

I don't have any mails (or haven't received yet) mails from seshat with a decision of any kind. What has been decided?
tex

_____

From: qalam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:qalam@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Pierpaolo BERNARDI
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 6:33 PM
To: qalam@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: hello

On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 18:55:46 +0200, Tex Texin <tex@... <mailto:tex%40yahoo-inc.com> com> wrote:

> Historically this list has busy periods and quiet periods. (Both of which
> are appreciated!)
>Unless you are referring to something other than the relative quiet of late.

I think he is referring to this:

>> > A posting dated June 4 was delivered on June 17.

Maybe Seshat can reconsider her decision, if we behave better?

Cheers
P.

> tex
>
> _____
>
> From: qalam@... <mailto:qalam%40yahoogroups.com> com [mailto:qalam@... <mailto:qalam%40yahoogroups.com> com] On Behalf Of
> Peter T. Daniels
> Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2006 6:23 PM
> To: qalam@... <mailto:qalam%40yahoogroups.com> com
> Subject: Re: hello
>
>
> suzmccarth wrote:
>>
>> --- In qalam@... <mailto:qalam%40yahoogroups.com> com, "Peter T.
> Daniels" <grammatim@...>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > A posting dated June 4 was delivered on June 17.
>> > --
>> > Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
>> >
>>
>> Peter,
>>
>> I am just dropping in to say hello to you and the list.
>
> The list is, for all intensive purposes (that was a mondegreen, but here
> it's apt), dead.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]