Re[2]: [G] Controlling Undesirables on Reflectors

marshall katz (
Mon, 22 Jan 96 13:32:46 EST

Jim, et al...

In your E-Mail, you state: "My feeling is that the mailing list would
function more effectively if replies to questions were NOT made via email
but to the List."

I agree with how you feel. However, I feel the CU-SeeMe-L list server
needs to "force feed" the archive files when someone subscribes for this
list. Alternatively, the Cornell & White Pine Web Pages need to "force
feed" the common questions BEFORE allowing someone to download the program.
There needs to be a reference to the archive files on everyones CU-SeeMe
Web pages, which in some cases, is nonexistent. The person responsible for
the archives has gone to alot of trouble to keep them up-to-date. If
nothing else, ask (even require) folks to do a Yahoo search on "CU-SeeMe".
WOW, look at all the references & sites returned. An information explosion
just occurred, but, you couldn't tell it here by reading questions that
repeat themselves.

Look at the archives. Many if not all of the "same 'ol problems" are
addressed there as well as again here day after day in this list. New
folks aren't reading what is in the compatibility text file(s) either that
come with CU-SeeMe. They continue to purchase products that are (or
aren't) on the list as "unknown" to work with Cu-Seeme and then get
frustrated when they get no reply. I'm limited to QuickCam and
ComputerEyes/RT. Others are just as limited, if not moreso.

As I stated, I agree with you, but, you need to put yourself in the
experienced person's shoes too. My (our) boss would have a fit if he/she
knew it took me (us) 2+ hours to go thru 167 messages from the past
weekend, and that was just on Monday. That doesn't leave much time for me
(us) to answer questions and also get my (our) job done, but I (we) try.
Now if the List grew by say 2 or 3 fold, most would have to drop out as I
(we) couldn't keep track of our normal business mail and this list's mail
volume. I lost count of the times I deleted something I shoulda saved
(smile). It may be time to unsubscribe and just look at the archives one a
month, a viable option for many. Personally, I'd hate to see that happen.

Don't forget, Cornell was paid for developing CU-SeeMe and when White
Pine releases their final "Commercial" version, they'll be paid too. Some
guy wrote a book and he's being paid. Now, the rest of us who answer
questions receive nothing except "Thank Youse", and that's enough for me
(us). Remember where their documentation will eventually come from, yes,
the Archive files.

So, although I agree with your statement above, you as well as others
need to be sensitive to the example I cited. I acknowledge that Cornell
and White Pine do answer questions, but, you folks want better and more
stable software, don't ya? (a rhetorical question) My grandma used to have
a saying for this type of situation, namely: "They (Cornell & White Pine)
can't be at 2 weddings with one rear end" (releasing error free software &
perfect documentation at the same time). Anyone who is in the ADP field
knows that documentation is LAST, but, also acknowledges that the job isn't
finished 'til the paperwork's finished! (to quote an office cartoon)

The duplication of effort can be easily remedied by reviewing the
archives, FIRST. The experienced folks know the answers are there. On the
flip side, just like with reflector problems these days, Cornell put a List
Serv on their Web page without proper staffing to monitor this list and
answer questions. Both Cornell and White Pine need to do a good job of
DOCUMENTATION when this product matures. For now, the documentation is
barely adequate, i.e., from all the questions being posted.

Sorry to use the bandwidth, but, this I believe expresses the opinion of
many of the folks consistently answering questions. Sorry for being

Respectfully, Marshall...