Chris L wrote:

> In all seriousness......
> Is there a way to keep this kind of trash off the PIClist?

Trash?  Can you provide a technical reference?

> Much good info ends up labeled as [OT], so filtering it all would be a
> shame.

I guess that's a choice you have to make.  Of course you could simply
filter Russell out if he's bothering you that much.

> Can a new tag such as [WAY OT]: or something similar be added for the
few
> people that repeatedly use this forum to sneak - preach???

Maybe a [RANT]: tag too?

> Or might I even ask, Russell, why would you even consider posting this
link
> here?

I really can't be sure of his "motives", but I suspect that he thought
that some here might be interested.  I seriously doubt that he thought
that all would.  AFAIC, Russell now has the right to tell you "why" he
would want to post something like that.  I suspect that you won't like
his reasons any better than the link.

> What purpose does it serve? Your having included no text makes it even
more
> smarmy..

Smarmy?  I'm sorry, but I fail to see the hypocrisy in Russell's post.
The only "smarmy" thing I can see here is your wish to censure Russell
whilst reserving the right to publicly classify *his* opinion as trash.
Where's the tolerance in that?

I'm not trying to start a fight, but it sure seems as though you are.
So before you begin a religious bashing session, perhaps you should
review the guidelines for the list.  Russell has been posting OT tidbits
for years.  If you prefer not to see his posts, that can be easily
accomplished by a careful application of filters.  I can't speak for
everyone, but I would much rather that people have the choice to do this
"censuring" on an individual by individual basis, rather than to see
some kind of all encompassing dictatorial ruling instituted just to
appease a minority opinion.

michael

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu