Carol Fretwell fretwelc at
Tue Aug 10 12:38:15 EDT 1999

coral list On Behalf Of Noah, Michael

Add $0.02 more and make it $0.04!

We can all empathize with Bob's motivation -- there's just such a volume
of incoming email some days that ANY way to reduce it sounds appealing(!)
--- however, I completely concur with Michael Noah's assessment of the
situation and proposed solution.

In my view, a previous "discussion" elicited much information and helped
to clear up various misconceptions that could easily have been erroneously
passed on as fact.  That would have only served to further distance
members of the global coral reef community.

Let's continue to bring researchers with coral reef knowledge, issues, and
questions together via real time so progress can be made more quickly,
with fewer detours caused by incomplete knowledge or understanding.

There is such a host of fields associated with coral reefs, most people
can pick and choose what appeals/applies to them, especially if we take
Michael's idea one step further.

In addition to maintaining the same subject field in a response chain,
perhaps the initiator could add to the success of Michael's plan by
ensuring that the subject line used is a true indicator of the subject,
perhaps using our old standby key words with appropriate modifiers.  Any
way, that's my $0.02.

Best to all,

Carol R. Fretwell


Carol R. Fretwell
Coordinator, Administrative Operations
National Coral Reef Institute
NSU Oceanographic Center
8000 N. Ocean Drive
Dania Beach, FL  33004  USA
1-954-262-3617 (voice);  1-954-262-4027 (fax)
fretwelc at

International Conference on
National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI)
April 14-16, 1999, Ft. Lauderdale, FL
can be found at

Bali, 2000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-coral-list at
> [mailto:owner-coral-list at]On Behalf Of Noah, Michael
> Sent: Monday, August 09, 1999 9:26 PM
> To: 'coral-list at'
> Subject: RE: coral-list
> 			While I fully understand Bob's concern regarding the
> "noise" that can often be generated from the posting of questions to the
> list and the subsequent replies, I would just like to offer my $0.02 worth
> with regards to changing the default "reply to" field.
> 			Due to a pretty wide range of interests (and my
> remoteness out here in Japan), I subscribe to many of these
> discussion lists
> (at last count, I have more than 50 being directed to their respective
> folders), and I have found that those lists that have moved to using the
> approach to replying that has been suggested usually fail to
> serve the needs
> of the subscribers, primarily because 1) the original poster
> fails to either
> "summarize" or adequately "summarize" the responses that s/he receives to
> their post, despite their every honorable intention to do so at the time
> they posed the question, and 2) since the "discussion" list is
> unable to see
> the trend in the replies being provided in real time, the
> "discussion" list
> is unable to generate that often-needed "discussion" (e.g., to engage in
> what we subscribed to the list to participate in doing in the first place,
> at least in my case)," and so the responses that are eventually received
> tend to be less valuable to the poster than what would have been generated
> had the subject or question been more openly "debated."  If the discussion
> list does receive a summary from the original poster, but
> disagrees with or
> wants to add something to the final results, the question/response/summary
> process starts anew, only now with a new poster responsible for
> posting the
> results that they receive, with the obvious extension in the time that it
> takes for the participants on the list to reach a consensus.
> 			I would suggest instead that subscribers to the
> list, first of all, refrain from changing the text of the subject
> field when
> they post a reply.  Then, when the post is received, the
> recipient can then
> sort the list by subject and date/time at the start of each day, and then
> read the original post.  If they are uninterested in the subject of that
> post, highlight and delete all of the subsequent responses with the same
> subject field without bothering to read them.  This process works
> quite well
> for me, anyway.
> 			Again, just my $0.02 worth...
> 			Mata ne,
> 			Michael
> 			 <<...>>
> 			US Army Corps
> 			of Engineers
> 			Japan District
> 			Michael D. Noah, Ecologist
> 			USAEDJ, Box 81 (CEPOJ-PP-E)
> 			APO AP   96338-5010
> 			011-81-311-763-5065
> 			011-81-311-763-8869 FAX
> 			Michael.Noah at
> <mailto:Michael.Noah at>
> 				-----Original Message-----
> 				From:	rginsburg at
> [mailto:rginsburg at]
> 				Sent:	Saturday, August 07, 1999 5:47 AM
> 				To:	Jim Hendee;
> coral-list at
> 				Subject:	Re: coral-list
> 				Jim,
> 				I wonder if we could in some way avoid
> having all the replies to a question
> 				posted on the List?  Could you suggest that
> when someone raises a question
> 				or comment, that they become the reporter
> and all replies and experessions
> 				of interest are directed to them instead of
> to the entire list?  Then,
> 				after they have had some feedback, they
> could post a  summary?  That way,
> 				all the rest of us need not receive every
> comment and reply?  If you want
> 				to cite me as the proposer of this plan,
> please do so.
> 				Bob

More information about the Coral-list-old mailing list