[CR]Why not consider the cost of an email to be $1, use better titleing and much more restraint?

(Example: Component Manufacturers:Chater-Lea)

From: "brian blum" <bbspokes@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:54:27 -0700
In-Reply-To: <cbb254880807241001h4c5f831en73e513e5156d12e1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ED3CBEE8-569C-4C01-AF7C-4BCA273061AE@northnet.org> <411309c50807240943o38e00094l58194f3cf9a481d8@mail.gmail.com>
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: [CR]Why not consider the cost of an email to be $1, use better titleing and much more restraint?

These email lists reach over 1000 people each, the time consumed for each email is at least 10 seconds. That means the cost of each email is 3 man hours per 1000 people. Most of the emails are almost worthless. I do not c onsider the value of the lists to be conversational, for that you can ema il each other directly. I have reduced my participation over the last 10 y ears as the quality of these lists have degenerated. Now I delete 95 percen t of the emails without opening them probably missing some good content thi s still waste a lot of time. The stuff I open is usually marginal. I wish people would think about the quality of their contributions and please use better title line descriptions. Brian Blum in Berkeley

_________________________________________________________________ With Windows Live for mobile, your contacts travel with you. http://www.windowslive.com/mobile/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_mobile_ 072008