JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for GEM Archives


GEM Archives

GEM Archives


GEM@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

GEM Home

GEM Home

GEM  September 2009

GEM September 2009

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: full inboxes

From:

Martin Bazley <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Martin Bazley <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 3 Sep 2009 19:02:12 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (131 lines)

Dear Paul and all

Filtering GEM list messages into a separate folder is easy to set up,
but does not solve the problem: the messages just build up, and the more
there are (and the more you feel are irrelevant to you) the less likely
you are to look through them all.    I have tried this with other lists
and find I just end up deleting the folder contents every so often.
With GEM messages mixed in with other messages it is easy to scan and
delete or respond to them when you have a spare moment.  

I know it was made with some irony, but I don't find the suggestion that
"we'd lose the opportunity to discover interesting snippets of
information - like how to make fake blood" very helpful.   On that
basis, a message on virtually any topic at all might 'potentially' be of
interest.   There are plenty of places online to swap snippets of
information, if that's what you are into.    

Like Steve Thompson earlier, I found a recent response a bit annoying:
it was a one-liner addressed to one person but copied to over 1000
others.   I emailed Steve to thank him for making the point, and we had
a short exchange off-list.   I am posting this to the whole list now
because I don't think Paul's summary was representative of the consensus
reached when this was last discussed.   Certainly I had a number of
replies, some off-list, arguing for restraint.  

It seems people have become more conscious recently of the value of
online presence - sometimes posts seem intended more at reminding
everyone else they are there, than offering something helpful.   Some
exchanges seem more appropriate for say, Twitter than a large email
list.   

This list is focused on Education in Museums, and has worked extremely
well based on the above etiquette for many years.  There is no shortage
of discussion on the list, on topics meaty enough to warrant it.
Conversely, I cannot think of many examples where this type of 'snippet
tennis' generates new meaningful discussion.   I think most of us feel
we have too much information coming in, not too little.   

The GEM list is great for discussions, and also great for asking people
for information.  If the original message is just a request for a
snippet of information, I think it is more considerate to reply to the
person making the request.   If you want to know about it too, just
email the person who made the request.  

This list is set so that if you hit Reply, the message goes to the
sender only.   So you have to make a conscious effort to reply to the
whole list.  

Yours (realising I probably sound a bit grumpy, but trying to be
helpful...), 
Martin
GEM list owner




-----Original Message-----
From: List for discussion of issues in museum education in the UK.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Baker
Sent: 03 September 2009 17:11
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: full inboxes

Greetings!

This issue was discussed at length a few months ago. I think most people
saw 
the sense in all replies going to the group, unless they were clearly
only 
of interest to the enquirer. Otherwise, the GEM list archive would
become a 
list of questions with no answers, and we'd lose the opportunity to
discover 
interesting snippets of information - like how to make fake blood.

I'd recommend all GEMmers to set up message rules. Most email packages
allow 
you to do this. All incoming GEM list messages are addressed to 
[log in to unmask] and can be easily auto-diverted into a separate
folder, 
so they don't clutter your main inbox. Then you can ignore them until
you 
have time to browse.

Best wishes,

Paul Baker
Supreme Commander
Diabolus in Musica
Historical musicians in costume
Replica musical instruments and historical artifacts
Interactives, websites, audio & video work
[log in to unmask]
www.diabolus.org



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Thompson" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: Fake blood


Afternoon folks, can we please send replies only to the poster unless
there 
is a good reason for filling up everybody else's inboxes.

Thank you

Steve

Steve Thompson
Community Learning Officer
North Lincolnshire Museums Service
01724 843533 ext 114
NLC ext 7055

This e-mail expresses the opinion of the author and is not necessarily
the 
view of the Council. Please be aware that anything included in an e-mail
may 
have to be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act and cannot be 
regarded as confidential. This communication is intended for the 
addressee(s) only. Please notify the sender if received in error. All
Email 
is monitored and recorded.
Please think before you print- North Lincolnshire Council greening the 
workplace.
= 

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager