Re: Public Comments - Kate mullins
Subject: Re: Public Comments
From: Kate mullins
Date: February 21, 1998

I have enjoyed your posts--in the past you have looked up data for me on 
Prathers so I know how helpful you can be.  Some are of no interest to me but 
I appreciate the opportunity to decide for myself what I am interested in.  
Thanks.  Kate

From: 	Steven Coker
Sent: 	Saturday, February 21, 1998 1:45 PM
To: 	[email protected]
Cc: 	[email protected]; Adrian Hopkins
Subject: 	[SCROOTS-L] Public Comments

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 
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 
you and others concerned with the issue of the 30 or so messages I posted last

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 
comments from several people asking specifically about the Island's history.  
decided to post that information because the 190 year old book from which it 
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 
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 
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 

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 
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.  
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 
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 
getting very upset because they were regularly being interrupted while they 
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 
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 
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 
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 
they would take the time to read each of them if they are of the mind that 
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 
to find out one way or the other.  But, let us all try to keep any discussion 
the subject limited, civil, and let us not clog up the list service with this


Steven J. Coker

[email protected] wrote:
> Enough is enough. If you can't stop Coker from so many messages, then take 
> 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 ====

Go To:  #,  A,  B,  C,  D,  E,  F,  G,  H,  I,  J,  K,  L,  M,  N,  O,  P,  Q,  R,  S,  T,  U,  V,  W,  X,  Y,  Z,  Main