FWIW, as someone who not only takes advantage of the asynchronous nature of email but who sometimes finds himself unable to read relevant IETF lists more often than once a day or so, +1. And, again, fwiw, if we are really serious about being inclusive, "persuading" long-time participants to give up because we don't fit some model that is preferred by others is at least as bad as being unwelcoming to newcomers. john --On Saturday, October 14, 2023 19:02 +0100 Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hiya, > > On 14/10/2023 18:52, Paul Wouters wrote: >> I read the list once in a while using a threaded mail client >> and half the screen is counting the other half of the screen. > > Yeah, but so what? > > Reason I'm going on a bit more about this is I think the whole > "these email lists are toxic" or "we should only ever discuss > things on the most-specific mailing list possible" points are > by > now overblown - the pendulum has IMO swung too far away from > what > is not a bad way to operate for people who find the > asynchronous > nature of email discussion just fine, even if there's a bot > mail > or silly argument now and then. > > So I'd ask those of you who prefer other means of interaction > to be a little more tolerant of those who are ok with imperfect > humans (ab)using list email if that's ok:-) > > Thanks, > S. > > PS: I include in the above sending (what seem to me) > critical-sounding > mails to first-time posters who've used this list instead of a > WG > list.
