Re: Splitting the ForestNet!

• To: Multiple recipients of list FOREST <FOREST@LISTSERV.FUNET.FI>
• Subject: Re: Splitting the ForestNet!
• From: "C. Hobart Perry" <hperry@FORESTRY.UMN.EDU>
• Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 09:01:29 -0500
• content-length: 1103
• Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
• Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
• Reply-To: FOREST Mailing list on forest research and studies <FOREST@LISTSERV.FUNET.FI>
• Sender: OWNER-FOREST@LISTSERV.FUNET.FI

>SPLITTING THE FORESTNET
>
....snipped out....
>
>May I therefore suggest two changes?
>
>1 The forest list is split into the individual catagories TOPICs
>(or sub-groups of them);
>
>2 The ForestNet have a separate component for those interested
>_only_ in plantations. There is a fair amount of discussion on
>this, and the management of forests proper, although interesting,
>is not relevant to a lot of subscribers, I am sure.

I would like to say that in my opinion we should NOT split the forest list.
To my mind, the volume is low enough that I can quickly sort through the
uninteresting material. It also provides the opportunity to be exposed to
material that I would otherwise ignore.

Those who have to pay for email may disagree.

Hobie
--
C. Hobart Perry                   Department of Forest Resources
hperry@forestry.umn.edu           College of Natural Resources
(612) 625-5765 (office)           University of Minnesota
(612) 625-5212 (fax)              115 Green Hall
                                  1530 N. Cleveland Ave.
                                  St. Paul, MN  55108  USA

• Re: Splitting the ForestNet!
• From: "Brian HADDON 819-779-3000 Ext.1973" <bhaddon@AM.NCR.FORESTRY.CA>

• Prev: Re: POSITION IN WOOD SCIENCES
• Next: Re: Splitting the ForestNet!
• Index: Forest mailing list October 1995
• Thread: Forest list subjects in October 1995