On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 05:42:19 -0400, Pierpaolo BERNARDI
<bernardp@...> wrote:

> Since Seshat lately is somewhat lazy in approving messages

Aw, gee... (Sorry, that probably won't be understood by some people for
whom English is not their native language. It's a gentle expression.
Translations welcome!)

I surely wish to be peaceful in my comments. It seems to me that Seshat is
one the world's more civilized people, and I have an extremely high regard
for civilization at its best. I still recall the effect of the wording
(iirc, "show thee the door") with which she long ago publicly dismissed
one persistent subscriber who simply wouldn't behave. I rather doubt that
she loves to take on the role of policing Qalam. Then, a few days' delay
in posting gives the sender time to re-consider message content, and
conceivably retract or re-word a message.

Yours truly is not free of sin, for what that's worth:
One of the basic essentials of using e-mail is learning about Bcc:, but
typical computer users seem to know nothing about it.
Concisely, failure to respect the privacy of my e-mail address
("e-ddress") by placing it in the To: or Cc: e-mail header fields, along
with the e-ddresses of many others, has made me send angry messages (no
crude language or name-calling, though), but that has not happened here.
I was blaming people who simply did not know about Bcc: and were usually
innocent. (Google on some such phrase as [why bcc is important] to find
some excellent explanations.)

In summary, if Seshat seems to be lazy, I don't think that's accurate.

My best regards to all/kær kvedja/ystävällisin terveisin, (I think I
spelled the second one right; I don't speak either of those languages...)

--
Nicholas Bodley /*|*\ Waltham, Mass.
Truly remarkable, often surprising,
and often lovely images -- recommended:
<http://www.liquidsculpture.com/>
(I have no connection with them, btw.)