Despite Hal's suggestion that everyone on Tweeters has seen the guidelines,
I had not. I have subscribed and unsubscribed to Tweeters many times over
the years (due to travel, busy schedule, or other reasons), and stopped
reading the Tweeters subscription mail after the first or second time,
figuring it was the same. I was apparently unsubscribed when the changes
were made, so I missed the changes and whatever discourse led to them being
instituted.

I have now read the guidelines and will follow the rules. I apologize for
creating a raft of e-mail about an off-topic subject.

However, I also miss the old days, when it seemed there were more
wide-ranging, back-and-forth conversations, often a bit hot but normally
civil, more input from professional ornithologists and other scientists, and
the wonderfully open and often-voiced opinions of Don Baccus. But perhaps
that is a normal progression of this new technology as it becomes more
mainstream.

Mike Seamans
Seattle,
crexcrex at wolfenet.com

I
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Victor <dcv at scn.org>
To: Mike and Shirli <crexcrex at wolfenet.com>
Cc: Tweeters (Cascadia) Birding Email <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
Date: Monday, January 31, 2000 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: Ooops Not!


>Hi Mike,
>
>Please take a look at the posting guidelines, especially the inappropriate
>topics section. If you or anyone else have further comments on these
>guidelines please send them to me privately at dcv at scn.org
>
> http://www.scn.org/earth/tweeters/guidelines.html
>
>Thanks,
>
>--Dan
> Dan Victor, Seattle, mailto:dcv at scn.org ___.-////
> Web = http://www.scn.org/~dcv/ \_>
>
>On Mon, 31 Jan 2000, Mike and Shirli wrote:
>
>> Nonsense! Who has determined that cat issues are not
>> appropriate for Tweeters? ...
>
>