>I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't have the hours it is taking
>to read through the list every day. And if I miss a day, it takes even more
>time even to delete the messages I don't have time to read, and to find
>those few that I do.
Judy, if you switch to the digest, you will be able to go through the daily
messages in no time at all. And if you do not have the time for even that,
you can with a click of the mouse delete the whole digest message and make
use of the archives when you have the time.
>***I think that with the increased volume to the list we really ought to
>seriously consider creating an internet news group for raw foods.
The list has been very busy lately but it also has periods when the pace is
not so hectic. Even so, for a newsgroup not to be overrun with solicitors
and frivolous posters of all kinds, it would need to be moderated meaning
that every message gets screened by a moderator before being posted on the
newsgroup. This will not only interrupt the flow of the dialogue but also
open the door to censorship, and I cannot imagine anybody who would want to
take on such a responsibility. Another drawback is that a newsgroup has
poor archive features - I believe only temporary storage with very basic
search capability, no digest and many other features that the listerv
>I don't know technically how this is done, but with all the brain power on
>the list, I'm sure someone does. An added bonus would be that an internet
>newsgroup would give raw foods even more exposure than the list does, as I
>believe it is easier to search for a newsgroup than a mailing list.
People are generally more knowledgeable of newsgroups than of listgroups.
We are thinking of doing some advertising for raw-foods on the net and if
the list continues to grow, lower the daily total limit for messages. It is
presently set at 50 which may be too high.
Thanks for the feedback!
[log in to unmask]