Klarinet Archive - Posting 000461.txt from 1995/03

From: Gary Bisaga <gary@-----.ORG>
Subj: Re: Charges for On-Line Time
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 17:01:30 -0500

Jonathan Cohler said:
>``someone mentioned the possibility of "digesting" the list. I, for
>one, wish to register strong opposition to this concept, because it is
>a HUGE time waster. By putting messages into single files, you defeat
>the entire functionality of E-mail software, which is what allows you
>rapid and convenient access to messages in the first place!
>...
>``You get the drift. Vote NO on digesting!''

Is there any reason everybody should *have* to receive a digest form?
Most of the lists I'm familiar with run both a live feed and a digest
form, and only under extreme circumstances (not here) would I suggest
*only* running a digest form. It should be a personal opinion whether
one wants to receive digested form or not.

As for your specific comments about digesting, I can't agree. (This
is a personal opinion.) Here's why:

- Since digesting is standard, many mail programs can undigestify the
digests into individual messages with a single keystroke.
- To me it's a big improvement to only have a few large digests in my
mailbox instead of 50-60 small individual messages. I can easily
skip over them to read them later or just delete them wholesale if
I'm not going to have time to go through them all.
- Digests simplify archiving: might we want to keep archives the future?

It seems like it makes sense to have an *option* to digestify.

Gary