Jarmo Saarikko (METLA) wrote: > > During recent years I have requested a discussion twice to have a separate > list for forest policy, but so far a small majority of the respondees have > wanted to have a single list. It seems that another request is needed > again. However, it seems now that I will start a separate list for > forest-reseach and keep this list as the forest-policy list. > Any comments on this? > Jarmo, I think that you've done a excellent job of managing this list. By and large, you have been invisible (which is the way it should be), except when list integrity forced you to step in. I would support the separation of the existing list into 2 distinct lists, one for "research" and one for "policy". My one concern, however, is that it is not always easy to separate "forest research" from "forest policy". Would the "forest research" list be prohibited from discussing policy implications of forest research? Would "forest policy research" be excluded? It is not clear to me where the line would be drawn between "research" and "policy". Obviously, there are many postings that fall into one group or the other quite easily. But, I can envision others for which the distinction would not be so clear. Along with separating the lists, there need to be some guidelines that circumscribe the bounds of each list, and also perhaps how to handle borderline topics. DAN -- ==================== mailto:schmoldt@vt.edu ======================== Daniel L. Schmoldt Brooks Forest Products Center USDA Forest Service Virginia Tech (540)231-4674 (FAX 8868) Blacksburg VA 24061-0503
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0