Steve, I don't have to delete the ones that are pertinent and appreciate
the work.  I for one am delighted to have gotten the Holt material.  Now
are there any Arants or Hancocks?  Keep up the good work.  Don't let them
get you down.  It's time for them to learn to use a delete key.
Helene

----------
> From: Steven Coker 
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; Adrian Hopkins 
> Subject: Public Comments
> Date: Saturday, February 21, 1998 11:45 AM
> 
> To: Sarah Browder and the other subscribers
> cc: Adrian Hopkins, List Owner 
> 
> This one time public statement is offered for consideration by the list
owner
> and all subscribers.  It would be best if responses were not sent to the
list
> service.  They should be sent to me or to the list owner.  
> 
> I'm sorry if any of you don't like the information I posted.  Most of it
> contains genealogical resources on numerous surnames in South Carolina
during
> the 1670-1900 period.  Including membership roles, poll lists, patient
lists,
> property owner lists, etc.  With a couple of exceptions I generally only
posted
> items that contained genealogical gems mentioning more than a few
surnames. 
> Here are my some of my thoughts on the matter which I offer for
consideration by
> you and others concerned with the issue of the 30 or so messages I posted
last
> night.
> 
> 1. All of the 30 or so messages were small, most 4k or less.  
> 
> 2. Almost all were on topic with interesting information useful for
genealogy
> researchers.  The two that may have stretched the boundaries were about
the
> Attack on Sullivan's Island.  Those two were posted in response to
inquiries and
> comments from several people asking specifically about the Island's
history.  I
> decided to post that information because the 190 year old book from which
it was
> taken is not readily available to most people.
> 
> 3. I've gotten many comments from other readers thanking me for the
posts. 
> Nobody has ever complained directly to me about any of them.  Quite the
> contrary, so far I've only gotten positive responses.  Several have asked
me to
> look for specific information on their surnames, which I have often done
as
> asked.  One person did childishly forward several of the messages back to
me
> without comment or explanation of any kind.  
> 
> 4. I tried to be selective about what I posted.  I tried not to post
items that
> didn't have information of interest to a wide audience.  That audience
being
> persons seeking genealogy information and resources for South Carolina.
> 
> 5. I did the work late at night when the net servers should not be
working
> hard.  So the routing would have no effect on the system.  Of course 30
or so
> small messages over an 8 hour period wouldn't have had any effect on the
net
> servers anyway.
> 
> 6. I don't consider it "hogging" because I wasn't posting information for
> myself.  I was posting information to help others, not myself.  I've
already
> received messages from others saying the information has helped them. 
Several
> such responses arrived while I was doing the work last night.  Such
positive
> responses stimulated me to continue past when I would have otherwise
ceased the
> work.
> 
> 7. I could have "spread out" the messages and not sent so many in one
night. 
> But, I actually thought that concentrating them would be better for the
digest
> editions.  Figured putting all those short messages in a few digests
seemed like
> a way to make them easier to use and save for future review. 
> 
> 8. I was born and raised in Columbia, South Carolina, and have lived in
> Charleston for many years.  My various family lines are spread throughout
the
> State and most have been here for 200-300+ years.  I graduated from the
> University of South Carolina and spent many hours in Caroliniana Library.
 I've
> done research in the State Archives, the Huguenot Society archives, and
I'm a
> past member of the SC Historical Society, and the Sumter and Columbia
chapters
> of the S.C. Genealogical Society.  I offer this information by way of
explaining
> that I feel that I have an above average understanding of the State, its
> history, and the genealogy of some of the families found here.  Thus, I
feel I
> have some ability to discriminate which types and sources of information
might
> be useful to a wider audience.  However, I do not purport to be an
expert, a
> historian, or a professional genealogist.  I am just an interested
amateur who
> likes to help share information.
> 
> The only negative I thought might be perceived would be that its a lot of
> messages from one person.  But, I decided since they were on topic
general
> interest subjects that I would be forgiven for that little sin.
> 
> Since I sent all of them before most folks got up this morning, the
messages
> should all be delivered at once when each subscriber logs in for the day,
not
> dribbled in.  If anyone is having these messages being delivered or
announced
> one message at the time, there must be something wrong about how their
email
> program is configured.  When they first installed email programs on the
140+
> computers in our offices, the default setup was for every incoming
message to
> spawn a popup message and an audio alarm.  Well, it wasn't uncommon for
people
> in the office to receive dozens of messages every day.  People were
cussing and
> getting very upset because they were regularly being interrupted while
they were
> trying to work by the alarms and popup messages.  We simply showed them
how to
> turn off those alarms and set their email program to just blink the icon,
or do
> nothing, when new mail arrived.  That solved the problem and ended the
> annoyance.  They get even more email now than they did when it was setup
years
> ago.  But, now it simply sits politely in their inbox until they get time
to
> check the mail.  It doesn't interrupt or annoy them.  
> 
> I hope that any problems or concerns subscribers might be having with
receiving
> 30 or more messages per day aren't caused by such simple things as an
email
> alarm sounding.  Such simple annoyances can be turned off if the
subscriber
> chooses to do so.  Isn't the information more important than having a
little
> bell dinging when a message arrives?
> 
> When someone gets around to checking their mail, if they find a lot of
stuff
> that doesn't interest them, then its easy to delete it.  Takes about 1-2
seconds
> per message to delete them individually.  Or, group deletions can be done
even
> faster.  The only way it could take a lot of time to delete 30 or so
messages
> would be if the user stopped to read each one first.  It seems
incongruous that
> they would take the time to read each of them if they are of the mind
that they
> don't want to see these types of messages.
> 
> In conclusion, if either the list owner or a significant number of the
> participant's find my postings undesirable, then I will of course cease
> contributing to the list service.  However, as I said earlier, I have to
date
> received many complimentary thanks for the postings and, until now,
almost no
> complaints.  Perhaps following this public statement of my thoughts on
the
> matter I will find there are many others who agree with you.  I'll be
interested
> to find out one way or the other.  But, let us all try to keep any
discussion of
> the subject limited, civil, and let us not clog up the list service with
this
> discussion.  
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Steven J. Coker
> 
> 
> [email protected] wrote:
> > 
> > Enough is enough. If you can't stop Coker from so many messages, then
take me
> > off the list. I had over 35-40 this morn. I do not have time to read SC
> > history. I am interested in genealogy.  But that still takes time just
to
> > delete that many messages. Let me know if you intend to stop him or I
and
> > others will have to get off the list.  Thanks
> > Sarah Browder
> > 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
==== SCROOTS Mailing List ====