[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Name tags?



ShiekOfEntropy@aol.com wrote:

> This list is very much a reflection of the kinds of discussions Mark prints
> in the Groo letter column; very little of it has anything to do with what
> actually happened in a given issue of Groo (Niagara Falls!), but is rather a
> forum for people to have fun and to (hopefully) be clever; if we can do that
> PLUS discuss the latest issue, then that's just great!

	Don't forget that what you think the list is about is not neccessarily
what everyone thinks the list is about, or what people try to get out of
it.  

> Every once in a while someone complains about off-topic postings, but if all
> we ALLOWED was discussions of how much we enjoyed the latest infrequent issue
> of Groo, especially page 12 panel 3, well, this list would probably peter out
> due to lack of on-topic posts, because there's only so much to say beyond "I
> loved it" or "I didn't."

	I guess I'm one of those people (I guess I wasn't subtle enough....). 
My complaint stems from some of the posts that really don't seem to be
(IMHO) directed at, or of intrest to, a significant portion of the
Groop.  Rather, they become threads of replies to one-liners or
off-topic anecdotes, or unrelated jokes, or whatever.  My opinion is
that one of the benefits of joining a community like a mailing list is
to be able to participate in mutually stimulating discussions bout a
mutually stimulating topic (ie: Groo!).  I'm not against OT posts in
general, but all I ask is that we consider whether the reply should be
private rather than public (I think a few of you will vouch that I carry
on a lot of private threads when they first started publicly).

> In fact, ReallyBigChin tried to get something going with his "If Groo Was A?"
> shtick, and very few people responded. Those who did were very clever and
> funny, as usual! Hey, it got us thinking analytically about our favorite
> character, trying to shoehorn him into various new jokes.  I DON'T consider
> this off-topic at all!

	I thought that was a great thread.  From what I recall, quite a number
of people replied (perhaps 5 or 6?).

And that's all I have to say (in public) about that,
Ruben.

PS: I realize that maybe I'm not speaking for anyone else, but I hope I
am! :-}}