[UA] Re: [UA] (OT)

[Matthew Rowan Norwood]

> Can't we just drop this thread?  Someone's already mentioned Nazism.  At
> least two people have gotten defensive, and no one's opinion is changing.

I know I'm banned from this thread and all, but I just wanted to make
clear that all the Nazi stuff was facetious. I was doing anything I
could to stop that ungodly (heh) thread for developing any further, and
I thought that mentioning Hitler on a thread was supposed to kill it
automatically, forever, for everyone.

It was wrong of me.

But now I am Saved.

In light of my recent conversion:

Even I am forced to admit that a lot of the OT conversation on this list
is pretty interesting. Unfortunately, a lot of it is also stuff I've
talked about a million times with a million people and have no interest
in rehashing. Perhaps we might entertain the notion of starting another
list/forum somewhere for non-UA conversations among members of this
community? At the very least, we should adopt some standards for topics
that never mention UA. This would still be annoying for digest members,
who have to scroll through every message, but non-digest subscribers
could automatically filter messages with subjects like "[UA] blah blah
(OT)" into a separate folder. If a UA-related thread starts sprouting
completely OT branches, we could append "(OT)" at the end of the
message, for instance. This would group on- and off-topic threads close
together on the list archive pages, but it would still enable filtering
to work.

So I guess that's the standard I'm proposing. I've begun practicing what
I preach by appending "(OT)" to the subject of this email. Please
comment/modify/counter-propose, but I implore you to append (OT) to your
subjects for the benefit of those on the list who'd rather not read
about such administrative issues.

Thanks,

Matt Norwood

_______________________________________________
UA mailing list
UA at lists.uchicago.edu
http://lists.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/ua