Re: is this board alive?

WazoO wrote:
> "Mike Easter"

>> IMO, JT's 'declaration' could've been that it was his intention to
>> only personally do any of his posting to the forum.  The business of
>> removing
>
> It all starts back with
>
http://news.spamcop.net/pipermail/spamcop-list/2004-January/071447.html
> Not sure why you'd want to start that battle all over again.

Start?  I didn't start.  I'm just a participant in this thread.  Someone
started a thread because of this group's inactivity, I said people lurk
and post, Jeff G. sed it was a dead group re activity whereas the forum
had a lot more activity and I 'splained that was because these groups
had become stealthed.

I didn't start anything.  I lurked and when someone started a
conversation I joined in and discussed.

There's nothing about the link you posted that would justify 'hiding'
the .help and .mail ng/s from view on the web pages.  It strikes me as
strange that the web pages often suffer so severely from not getting
updated;  but if there's an 'agenda' then some change becomes very
important and /then/ the faq gets some special type of updating.

IMO, the faq should have never been changed in a way to conceal the
.help and .mail ng/s.  I think the kinds of 'forces' of support should
only be positive forces, not negative ones.  I think every positive
effort should be made to help the forum be 'strong' -- such as your
ability to do things there.  I don't think /anything/ should be done
negatively to weaken some other area, such as the ng/s.

I realize that the original 'intention' was to /replace/ the ng/s with
the forum, but that thinking wasn't the best thinking.  The best
thinking is to make the forum strong and to do nothing to weaken the
ng/s.

-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin