¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io
  1. Willystech
  2. Topics

List Policy Suggestion

William T Wilson
 

I was just thinking; another mailing list I'm on that deals with several
different "flavors" of vehicle under the same general topic encourages
their users to put in the subject line, which model they are referring to.

Would it be a good idea if we started doing the same thing here? For
example, they have [1], [2], [3] (for the three different "generations")
as well as [misc] and [none] - for things related but not to a particular
model, and things generally unrelated. [humor] is also in use; hopefully
self explanatory. :}

What this does is it gives people the opportunity to ignore messages that
they know aren't interesting to them. On the other hand, that's a pretty
high volume list; maybe we don't need a scheme like that here.

We could have [2a] [3a] [5] [PU] [DJ] [FC] and [W], for example.

Would this be of value, or just needlessly complex?
Ronald L. Cook
 

my $0.02 says it is needlessly complex. So much of this Willys stuff
overlaps. Besides, I am interested in it all.

Ron, IA
43GPW, 51M38
missed out on the CJ2A I was supposed to look at




William T Wilson wrote:


From: William T Wilson <fluffy@...>

I was just thinking; another mailing list I'm on that deals with several
different "flavors" of vehicle under the same general topic encourages
their users to put in the subject line, which model they are referring to.

Would it be a good idea if we started doing the same thing here? For
example, they have [1], [2], [3] (for the three different "generations")
as well as [misc] and [none] - for things related but not to a particular
model, and things generally unrelated. [humor] is also in use; hopefully
self explanatory. :}

What this does is it gives people the opportunity to ignore messages that
they know aren't interesting to them. On the other hand, that's a pretty
high volume list; maybe we don't need a scheme like that here.

We could have [2a] [3a] [5] [PU] [DJ] [FC] and [W], for example.

Would this be of value, or just needlessly complex?
Mike Boyink
 

I agree! Too complex, not enforceable enough, the vehicles all share so
many components, and the traffic on this list is manageable enough.

Mike Boyink (I remember when this came up on the Jeep-L too...)
Holland, MI
1966 CJ5
1983 6.2 GMC Rally Van (towdog)

From: "Ronald L. Cook" <rlcook@...>
Reply-To: WillysTech@...
To: WillysTech@...
Subject: Re: [WT] List Policy Suggestion
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 14:16:09 -0500

From: "Ronald L. Cook" <rlcook@...>

my $0.02 says it is needlessly complex. So much of this Willys stuff
overlaps. Besides, I am interested in it all.

Ron, IA
43GPW, 51M38
missed out on the CJ2A I was supposed to look at




William T Wilson wrote:

From: William T Wilson <fluffy@...>

I was just thinking; another mailing list I'm on that deals with several
different "flavors" of vehicle under the same general topic encourages
their users to put in the subject line, which model they are referring
to.

Would it be a good idea if we started doing the same thing here? For
example, they have [1], [2], [3] (for the three different "generations")
as well as [misc] and [none] - for things related but not to a
particular
model, and things generally unrelated. [humor] is also in use;
hopefully
self explanatory. :}

What this does is it gives people the opportunity to ignore messages
that
they know aren't interesting to them. On the other hand, that's a
pretty
high volume list; maybe we don't need a scheme like that here.

We could have [2a] [3a] [5] [PU] [DJ] [FC] and [W], for example.

Would this be of value, or just needlessly complex?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
WillysTech

NEW! Parts Buy/Sell/Swap Board

Vehicle FAQ Sheets

Parts Resource List

_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/

1 - 3 of 3