List content

[Dave & Diana Dwyer]

Hey Guys I find it difficult to understand how people can get so worked up about trivia like idle chat. I (and the rest of you) have received hundreds of MG-oriented messages and lots of useful information and opinions in (say) the last six months. In the same time I have seen maybe a few tens of fairly pointless messages, which probably amused at least those involved. I really don't mind those - I don't have to read them - and I think loud protests and threats to quit are quite an over-reaction to the drop in the ocean that they represent. How about we all lighten up a little? Regards Dave Dwyer J2, TA, TC

[Mark Andrew]

Just my point of view. Some people. and I do not really count myself to be in this group, feel that their time is so important that they feel they have little time for the important stuff on any list let alone the idle banter. It is just the way it is. Mark TC 5146 Dave & Diana Dwyer wrote:

> Hey Guys > > I find it difficult to understand how people can get so worked up about > trivia like idle chat. > > I (and the rest of you) have received hundreds of MG-oriented messages and > lots of useful information and opinions in (say) the last six months. In the > same time I have seen maybe a few tens of fairly pointless messages, which > probably amused at least those involved. > > I really don't mind those - I don't have to read them - and I think loud > protests and threats to quit are quite an over-reaction to the drop in the > ocean that they represent. > > How about we all lighten up a little? > > Regards > > Dave Dwyer > J2, TA, TC > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > >

[Spook01@comcast.net]

Badg, Saw your new sleds in the magazine article this month....going into the AC bidness are we? Best, mcg

----- Original Message ----- From: "BADGER" mrbadger@cox.net> To: "MG-TABC" mg-tabc@yahoogroups.com>; Diecuts@aol.com> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 1:26 AM Subject: Re: [mg-tabc] List content > Nope. > Not me. > No sir-ree. > I haven't the slightest idea. > I'm too scared to even venture a guess. > Badger > > > > Badger, > > > > You brought up stitches and sewing, and I happen to be sewing a hood, > ..Any idea on the number of stitches per inch to satisfy originality?? > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > >

[Badger]

Too late. I sold all those already. This weeks barn find consists of a TD, a TF, and an Allard Palm Beach. None of 'em have seen the light of day in 20 or 25 years - all basket cases. Anybody want one of 'em? Badger

> Badg, > Saw your new sleds in the magazine article this month....going into the AC > bidness are we? > Best, > mcg

[Eric Worpe]

I wonder how many share Mike Card's views about the "rubbish" on the tabc list, but have not dared to comment because to do so would encourage yet more "rubbish" in reply. Regards, Eric.

[LuckyFloridaLin@aol.com]

Dear Eric; I do not share "The Cards views". I truly enjoy most of the banter- tis like seasoning to a good meal. Especially delight in the intricate nuances of The Badger.Just leave it alone please! I belong to a Porsche Site which was incredibly dull-but is now becoming more human and enjoyable with its similar banter. It is the natural progression of friendship through common interests. Tally Ho! Thom Collins [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Robert Grunau]

I agree with Mike C, Peter P,Eric W, Bill T, TATerry, Harry P, etc. We don't want , or need , the nonsense that has been on the T-ABC list recently. Lets go back to square one, the T-ABC list was started to focus on technical matters for these cars and that is what will keep the list interesting and usefull. None of us joined to listen to idle chatter, somebodies idea of humour or garbage. We have lost several knowledgeable people in the past due to the lack of focus on T-ABC matters. I don't care if its "incredibly dull", I find it usefull. I find the majority of non-T-ABC comments boring and sometimes offensive. We just don't need that kind of input. And I do use my delete key, but why should I have to delete dozens of messages that are totally off topic? Lets keep our focus on MG T-ABC topics and leave the rest for a different forum. Regards, Bob Grunau.

[m_e_jablonski]

I'm with Mike Card and Peter Pleitner on this. I've noticed that genuine enquiries sometimes get completely ignored when there's a lot of waffle being thrown around. (I've had to repost for this very reason.) I've also had people write directly to me for assistance, feeling that the list was getting out of hand. Both of these outcomes would indicate that the list is diverging from its original purpose. I don't mind the inclusion of a bit of humour with a genuine response as well as the exchanges resulting from different points of view, but a lot of what's posted isn't even funny. Mark Jablonski Melbourne Australia

--- In mg-tabc@y..., Eric Worpe wrote: > I wonder how many share Mike Card's views about > the "rubbish" on the tabc list

[Rob & Tammy Greaves]

And for what its worth ..with almost 500 people on this List now ..I think we should have a basic rule of staying on T-ABC topics. My daily digest is getting longer every day, it takes longer just to scroll through it, and up to 2/3 of it is just off the cuff comments being thrown back and forth. The List was created to allow an exchange of owners' questions, answers and opinions which allow us to get and keep our vehicles running on the road. Rob Greaves [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Chip Old]

Okay people, enough! This never-ending and extraordinarily verbose argument over what is and is not appropriate message content for the MG-TABC list has reached the point of spewing far more non-T-Type content into the list than the relatively short off-topic messages that sparked the argument in the first place. -- Chip Old 1948 M.G. TC TC6710 XPAG7430 NEMGTR #2271 Cub Hill, Maryland 1962 Triumph TR4 CT3154LO CT3479E fold@bcpl.net