Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 8 Feb 1994 13:47:54 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
My problem is the same as Adrian Wenner's, maybe worse. I run statewide
research and educational programs and subscribe to three "professional"
lists.
Toggling among lists takes time. I average 50-150 mail messages per day
from my statewide duties. As such, I belong to the lumper class, one more list
and I will start dropping some. I probably would not monitor a basic
beekeeping recreational list, yet I hate to not have beekeeper input. I
don't see any reason why a beekeeper wouldn't have some interest in more
technical issues - after all, many earn their living this way. As a
former rancher, I would not have passed up the opportunity to talk
directly to the researchers. To date I haven't noticed anything so
technical that a beekeeper couldn't handle it with ease. (Unless I am so
used to the jargon that I have lost touch with reality).
Basically, it may be the lazy approach, but one list makes more sense to
me than several.
Thanks
Jerry Bromenshenk
[log in to unmask]
The University of Montana
On Tue, 8 Feb 1994, Adam Finkelstein wrote:
> Why is the forming of a Usenet group for beekeeping regarded as
> splitting or lessening Bee-l? One may subscribe to Bee-l and also receive
> Usenet. One may write to Bee-l, and post articles on Usenet.
> More area for discussion seems to be a positive thing.
> Adam
>
> --
> ===============================================================================
> Adam Finkelstein VDACS Apiary Inspector 116 Reservoir St Harrisonburg VA 22801
> 703-433-1006 (V) 703-434-5607 (Fax) 703-564-4394 (Pager)
> [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask] |Bees To Please|
> ================================================================================
>
|
|
|