>As a non-scientist I would not ordinarily (except when I have questions)
>respond to scientific posts, but it is for those posts (when they do
>appear) that I subscribe to the list. I don't remember the
>feminist-baiting posts (I probably just deleted and forgot them), and I
>don't now remember responses to them -- but probably I would simply have
>appreciated such responses rather than adding to the thread. I would
>like to check out the archives on this. When did that exchange take

The only thing fitting this description that I recall was at the
beginning of February, and Claudia Hemphill and I both responded.
It's archived here:

>I agree that there are probably too many mere fwds of news articles.

I probably send more to this list than anybody else, but this is not
a high-volume list--fewer than two messages a day (from everyone) on
average. My criterion for posting articles is whether they deal with
issues that would have been discussed in the magazine. If they spark
a response, which they occasionally do, so much the better. Of course
some people may have seen some of the stuff before and others won't
be interested--that's what the delete key is for. I find it handy to
have everything archived in one place, but if a significant number of
people find it irritating and don't want to filter me out, I will be
more selective.