Hello All,
I have received contact from vendors on this list and I do not think
it is appropriate. It has not grown to annoyance levels though.
Just my two unsolicited cents.
Doug Patac
On Jan 11, 2008, at 1:24 PM, Jeff Wallis wrote:
> Sorry to bring this topic up again, but after posting about
> antivirus, I received an email from
>
>> Mike Renzulli
>> Account Executive
>> UNICOM
>
> This feels like a violation of the list rules and inappropriate.
> Next time I will not be as open to posting on the list for fear of
> future spam from vendors. Have we determined the list rules?
>
> Jeff
>
> This e-mail may contain information protected under the Family
> Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). If this e-mail
> contains student information and you are not entitled to access
> such information under FERPA, please notify the sender. Federal
> regulations require that you destroy this e-mail without reviewing
> it and you may not forward it to anyone.
>
>>>> On 12/4/2007 at 8:03 PM, Vincent Rossano <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> This is a MIME message. If you are reading this text, you may want to
>> consider changing to a mail reader or gateway that understands how to
>> properly handle MIME multipart messages.
>>
>> --=__Part7B5D64F9.0__=
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>
>> Ray,
>> =20
>> Phil Hyjek and Steve Cavrak are the titular "owners" of this
>> list. Phil I =
>> haven't heard from in years. Steve Cavrak is a regular
>> contributor. But =
>> I don't think there were any real "rules and regs" about
>> appropriate =
>> material to be posted. Many of us old-time NetWare people used to =
>> subscribe to the listserv at CVU (and later So. Burlington) which, =
>> originally, was for school techies using NetWare. When VISMT got
>> fired =
>> up, one of the things they did was offer to set up lists that were
>> a bit =
>> more general for folks all around the state - not just the
>> northwest =
>> region. I think the only criteria was that the discussion would
>> be about =
>> issues of concern to school IT people. It wasn't any more
>> specific than =
>> that. Am I right, Steve Cavrak (and others)? =20
>> =20
>> I don't think people envisioned this as a forum that would include =
>> vendors, but, on the other hand, there were no specific rules
>> about that =
>> put in place. I don't think anyone even thought about it. It
>> would seem =
>> to me that if a clear majority of the list subscribers (I believe
>> there =
>> are about 235 now) felt vendors shouldn't post to the list,
>> vendors would =
>> honor that. But good arguments have been made on both sides of
>> the issue. =
>> If vendors were banned from posting OR listening, people might
>> feel freer =
>> to discuss issues they've had with these folks. For instance,
>> if I =
>> wanted to say that Mike Lambert was a friggin' idiot, I wouldn't
>> do it =
>> because he subscribes to the list. :-) =20
>> =20
>> On the other hand, we do sometimes get useful information from
>> these =
>> folks. I think the way Bryan Scofield interacts with the list is
>> a good =
>> compromise: if he sees something where he thinks he might have
>> some help =
>> to offer (or, yes, make a sale), he contacts the person who posted =
>> directly. Then, if that person wants to bring Bryan's response to
>> share =
>> with others on the list he/she can do so.
>> =20
>> However, in the case of Mike Lambert, for instance (and I'm not
>> joking =
>> now), he often has specific advice to offer that might help solve a =
>> problem that is being discussed - advice that doesn't require us
>> to pay =
>> him any money. That seems pretty useful. So, I don't know; it
>> gets =
>> fuzzy at times. (I get fuzzy all the time.)
>> =20
>> I do, though, think we probably all agree that we don't want
>> outright =
>> solicitations on this listserv, right?
>> =20
>> -Vince
>>
>>>>> Raymond Ballou <[log in to unmask]> 12/4/2007 7:22 PM >>>
>>
>> found this digging deep into the listserv commands.
>>
>> R.
>>
>>
>> * Owner=3D [log in to unmask] (Philip Hyjek)
>> * Owner=3D [log in to unmask] (Steve Cavrak)
>> * Errors-To=3D [log in to unmask] (Philip Hyjek)
>>
>>
>>
>> --=__Part7B5D64F9.0__=
>> Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>> Content-Description: HTML
>>
>> <HTML><HEAD><TITLE>found the owners</TITLE>
>> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html;
>> charset=3Diso-8859-15=
>> ">
>> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16544" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
>> <BODY style=3D"MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
>> <DIV>Ray,</DIV>
>> <DIV> </DIV>
>> <DIV>Phil Hyjek and Steve Cavrak are the titular "owners" of this =
>> list. Phil I haven't heard from in years. Steve Cavrak
>> is a =
>> regular contributor. But I don't think there were any real
>> "rules =
>> and regs" about appropriate material to be posted. Many
>> of us =
>> old-time NetWare people used to subscribe to the listserv at CVU
>> (and =
>> later So. Burlington) which, originally, was for school techies
>> using =
>> NetWare. When VISMT got fired up, one of the things they did
>> was =
>> offer to set up lists that were a bit more general for folks all
>> around =
>> the state - not just the northwest region. I think the only
>> criteria =
>> was that the discussion would be about issues of concern to school
>> IT =
>> people. It wasn't any more specific than
>> that. Am I =
>> right, Steve Cavrak (and others)? </DIV>
>> <DIV> </DIV>
>> <DIV>I don't think people envisioned this as a forum that would
>> include =
>> vendors, but, on the other hand, there were no specific rules
>> about that =
>> put in place. I don't think anyone even thought about
>> it. It =
>> would seem to me that if a clear majority of the list subscribers
>> (I =
>> believe there are about 235 now) felt vendors shouldn't post
>> to the =
>> list, vendors would honor that. But good arguments have been
>> made on =
>> both sides of the issue. If vendors were banned from posting
>> OR =
>> listening, people might feel freer to discuss issues they've had
>> with =
>> these folks. For instance, if I wanted to say
>> that Mike =
>> Lambert was a friggin' idiot, I wouldn't do it because he
>> subscribes to =
>> the list. :-) </DIV>
>> <DIV> </DIV>
>> <DIV>On the other hand, we do sometimes get useful information
>> from these =
>> folks. I think the way Bryan Scofield interacts with
>> the li=
>> st is a good compromise: if he sees something where he
>> thinks he=
>> might have some help to offer (or, yes, make a sale), he
>> contacts =
>> the person who posted directly. Then, if that person wants
>> to bring =
>> Bryan's response to share with others on the list he/she can do
>> so.</DIV>
>> <DIV> </DIV>
>> <DIV>However, in the case of Mike Lambert, for instance (and
>> I'm not =
>> joking now), he often has specific advice to offer that might help
>> solve a =
>> problem that is being discussed - advice that doesn't require us
>> to pay =
>> him any money. That seems pretty useful. So, I
>> don't =
>> know; it gets fuzzy at times. (I get fuzzy all the time.)</DIV>
>> <DIV> </DIV>
>> <DIV>I do, though, think we probably all agree that we don't want
>> outright =
>> solicitations on this listserv, right?</DIV>
>> <DIV> </DIV>
>> <DIV>-Vince<BR><BR>>>> Raymond Ballou
>> <[log in to unmask]
>> .US> 12/4/2007 7:22 PM >>><BR></DIV><!-- Converted from =
>> text/plain format -->
>> <P><FONT size=3D2>found this digging deep into the listserv
>> commands.<BR><B=
>> R>R.<BR><BR><BR>* Owner=3D [log in to unmask] (Philip Hyjek)
>> <BR>* =
>> Owner=3D [log in to unmask] (Steve Cavrak)<BR>* Errors-To=3D
>> phyjek@vermon=
>> tinstitutes.org (Philip Hyjek)<BR><BR><BR></FONT></P></BODY></HTML>
>>
>> --=__Part7B5D64F9.0__=--
|
