I have to agree with Michael, I for one like Russell's tidbits, not all
interest me, but a lot do.
As you said Chris, "much good info ends up labelled as OT". I'm sure you are
just as little interested in a lot of stuff that is tagged EE or PIC for
that matter. what do you do with that stuff? ignore it right? well, go ahead
and ignore this one too. as for the fact of there being no text.....RTF
SUBJECT LINE!
I welcome any useful comments you can make, but not bagging a correctly
tagged post for being exactly what it is, an OFF TOPIC POST.
In case you had missed the fact you are about 0.0005% of the opinions
onlist, a valued 0.0005% but still only that, so please don't try and ram
your opinions down our throats.
Have a lovely weekend :-).
Cheers,

Jonathan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pic microcontroller discussion list
> [mailto:PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of michael brown
> Sent: Sunday, 16 February 2003 2:44 PM
> To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: [OT]:Philosophy links
>
>
> 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
>

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