Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: lml
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 14:02:23 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1802159@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <valin.b.thorn1@jsc.nasa.gov>
Received: from jsc-ems-vws03.jsc.nasa.gov ([139.169.39.50] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b9)
  with SMTP id 1802154 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 13:50:19 -0400
Received: from 139.169.16.59 by jsc-ems-vws03.jsc.nasa.gov (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Thu, 10 Oct 2002 12:49:17 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
Received: by jsc-smtp01.jsc.nasa.gov with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
	id <R92G473N>; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 12:49:16 -0500
X-Original-Message-ID: <1848CABD3587A84DAC6B3F82FE01D9FC01F1FB9A@jsc-mail08.jsc.nasa.gov>
From: "THORN, VALIN B. (JSC-OM) (NASA)" <valin.b.thorn1@jsc.nasa.gov>
X-Original-To: "'lml@lancaironline.net'" <lml@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Splitting up the List?
X-Original-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 12:49:14 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain


I think this idea has its merits.  

Rather than calling it "splitting up the List", I see it as creating
multiple channels within the List.  There would still be an "ALL" channel
that submitters can send to.  And, if the administrators recognize a message
as being relevant to other or all channels they can redirect as appropriate.
For those who still want to see all the traffic they can just sign up for
each channel.  

I think many List members are reluctant to engage in some discussions out of
concern that some topics are not of enough interest to most of the members.
This multi-channel Lancair List structure should help remove that barrier to
participation.  For me, I'll listen to every List channel -- but most of my
messages would/will be to the Legacy community.

I vote we give it a try and decided after a couple of months whether most
member think it's better or not. 

Valin Thorn
Legacy