Message-ID: <00af01c09c08$8d6a4fc0$LocalHost@default>
From: "Martin Evans" <radio@emart.freeserve.co.uk>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <37.10fc5a30.27c44a8b@aol.com> <002101c09b9c$2ba968a0$a07e6395@vince> <3A93855D.CEA1171D@virgin.net>
Subject: Re: LF: Splitting the reflector.
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 11:42:45 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

I think that Stewart has an excellent idea here.
Martin Evans GW3UCJ


----- Original Message -----
From: "Stewart Bryant" <stewart.bryant@virgin.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: LF: Splitting the reflector.


> How about in the short term we agree to put an unambiguous marker
> in the subject line for the high tech postings (ie [TECH]) and then
> subscribers who do not want to see the postings can filter them straight
> to the bit bucket.
>
> Stewart G3YSX
>
> Vincent Ferme wrote:
>
> > Group,
> >
> > My preference is that we continue using this mailing list for all LF
related
> > topics. I remember the QRP group going through the same debate no once
but a
> > couple of times in the recent past. Other QRP mailing lists have been
setup
> > but they failed to solve the perceived problems. They actually caused
more
> > problems for people that did not want to miss anything and subscribed to
> > them and ended up having to deal with lots of cross-posted messages.
> >
> > Respectfully submitted.
> >
> > 73 de Vince, VA3VF.
>
>
>