GENTLEMEN AND GENTLEWOMEN I appreciated the list administrator's comments on trying to limit ourselves to forest managemnt and forest research. I concurr that comercial notices are out of place, or perhaps better said, clutter-up the this part of the Internet. There are other places for such interests to be announced, displayed and discussed. I would suggest as my criteria that real field experiences, study data and new research efforts are the most interesting for me. Then, the look for releated experiences, existing study data and recent related research efforts are good tipics, but of less interest to me. Finally notices about up-coming meetings, significant and specific actions of particular institutions (public or private) taking innovative forest management decisions which positively affect conservation, sustainability and/or the production of forest products and services also would be of some interest to me. (I'll not make comment on my interest in the negative effects that institutios make at this moment, as I believe the real issue here is to offer something positive that we all can use in our research efforts.) Using these criteria (or other suitable ones made known to us) as a systematic way of reviewing the actual use of our maillist might be useful statistical information for all of us at this time. If Greg Johnson's suggestion is more viable, please let me know. At 08:15 AM 2/11/97 +0200, you wrote: >On Mon, 10 Feb 1997, James Dorn wrote: > >> Isn't this a little bit out of place and should go elsewhere. > >Do you think that the list guidelines are out of place? My job >as the listowner is to keep some kind of control. I have nine >years of experience of running international mailing lists, >and please, do believe that it is important to weed advertising >out immediately. > >I have previously responded to this person privately but it seems to have >no effect. On previous occasions of blatant advertising the list suffered >a significant loss of subscribers because of junk-mail not related with >research. > >The list was originally started as a researchers' list but it seems to >have been swifting towards forest policy more and more year after year. I >have not wanted cencorship on the topics but I do restrict advertising. >There has been no critisim against the guidelines so far. > >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? > > >> his ""insight"", I teach Ecology on the university level, and firmly >> believe that this "Mother" earth must be managed to survive, especially >> the one's who believe it should just "do it's own thing" > >My message was independent of the content of Mr. Doyle's message >I hoped that this would have been conveyed in my message. I was >only against the advertising section. If he would have left out >the advertising part and just put out excerpts of his book, >I most obviously would not have responded at all. > >Yours sincerely, >Jarmo Saarikko, the listowner <forest-request@listserv.funet.fi> > >Finnish Forest Research Institute METLA Phone: +358-9-85705234 >Helsinki Research Centre Fax: +358-9-625308 >Unioninkatu 40 A E-mail: Jarmo.Saarikko@metla.fi >FIN-00170 HELSINKI, Finland URL: http://www.metla.fi/pp/JSaa/ > >
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0