🚀 go-pugleaf

Please use the -REQUEST address for mailing lists.  See note at end.
(It also seemed time to remind everyoine on the list of this as well.)

thanx -len

   Date: Mon, 27 Nov 89 23:21:04 EST
   From: Paul Steckler <steck@eric.ccs.northeastern.edu>

   Please add me to the mailing list.

     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    | Paul Steckler                     |     << Were I Britannia,           |
    | steck@eric.ccs.northeastern.edu   |        I'd waive the rules >>      |
     ------------------------------------------------------------------------

rlk's advice applies to your request for this list as well!!

   Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1986  18:44 EST
   From: "Robert L. Krawitz" <RLK@oz.ai.mit.edu>
   To: info-nets@oz.ai.mit.edu
   Subject: Sending requests to the list at large and other administrivia

   Recently, a number of people have requested to be removed by sending
   mail to the list as a whole.  This is very bad practice.

   First of all, the address info-nets-request exists for that purpose.
   In fact, the -request convention is standard throughout the arpanet,
   to solve this problem.

   Secondly, sending mail to the list reaches at least 300 recipients,
   very likely more than that, since I have no idea how large the various
   redistribution lists are (there are perhaps 250 actual addresses on
   the top-level list).

   Thirdly, there is no reason why info-nets mail should go to the same
   addresses.  For all anyone knows, I don't read info-nets (in fact, I
   do; it would be poor practice not to), the mail goes to completely
   independent addresses (this is in fact true), or I may have written a
   program to automatically process requests (I haven't).  It is still
   more convenient to me to process requests to info-nets-request than to
   info-nets.

   So, please remember to post administrative requests to
   <list-name>-request rather than to <list name>; specifically
   info-nets-request rather than info-nets.

   I deliberately have not yet processed the requests that went to
   info-nets rather than to info-nets-request; I would like those people
   to read this message.

   Robert Krawitz
   info-nets-request