Bookmark and Share

Notice: On March 31, it was announced that Statalist is moving from an email list to a forum. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, is already up and running.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: st: RE: Correct Way to Respond to Posts when Email is Turned Off

From   "David Radwin" <>
To   <>
Subject   RE: st: RE: Correct Way to Respond to Posts when Email is Turned Off
Date   Fri, 29 Jul 2011 13:25:04 -0700 (PDT)

I concur with Sam's opinion and rationales, except for the part about using 
gmail (which I don't disagree with but simply don't have an opinion about).

David Radwin
Research Associate
MPR Associates, Inc.
2150 Shattuck Ave., Suite 800
Berkeley, CA 94704
Phone: 510-849-4942
Fax: 510-849-0794

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:owner-
>] On Behalf Of Samuel R. Lucas
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 12:36 PM
> To:
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: st: RE: Correct Way to Respond to Posts when Email is Turned
> Off
> To me this goes in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" pile.  I
> really do not understand the rush of people from a technology that
> works well to another that may not offer any new functionality.  Such
> moves often resemble taking the circular tires off of a functioning
> car and installing the new, flashy, faddish square tires.  Yay.  I
> have square tires.
> If there is some major advanced functionality that a new approach
> offers, and it does not compromise the existing functionality, then no
> problem.  Often, though, something of value is lost.
> I like that I do not have to remember to go check a web-site.  Nor do
> I get reminders to go visit the web-site in my normal course of work.
> Nor am I interrupted by an RSS feed.  Stuff comes to me in the normal
> course of my activities.  If I am away, what arrived in my absence is
> still sitting there and I can read or ignore it if I want.  I can
> easily forward a message to someone with whom I am working if it looks
> useful to the group.  My interface is not encumbered by ads, pop-ups,
> or other web-clutter.  I do not have to give permission to scripting
> on the page to read anything.
> I admit all this was better when I did not use a gmail account for the
> listserv, but I was forced to do so for local reasons.
> So, count me as a "No" on this issue.
> Sam
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Marcello Pagano
> <> wrote:
> > We almost did a few years ago, but it was a little premature then and we
> > would have lost a few folks with less modern equipment.  Maybe we should
> > reconsider.  Any negative votes??  Don't give me the positives, I think

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2015 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index