Partly on Posting limits Plus Plenty of Rambling

[M.Clifford]

> Valky:
> Well, as a frequent debater myself I would also like to add that a 
large number of my personal list contacts were made through someone 
writing me personally to tell me *they* were thoroughly enjoying 
reading the debate. 

> 
> SSSusan:
> If I may step in here?  I'm not positive I know how to phrase this 
so it's understandable, but I'll try.  I think there may be a bit of 
speaking at cross purposes going on here.
> 
> To me, there's a difference between "tennis exchanges" and 
debate.  Debate is good!  Sometimes a thread does end up being 
primarily a two-person exchange, and as long as some real, meaty 
content is being put forth, with *movement* in the exchange, it can 
be fascinating to watch.  [I think of recent Pippin-Renee or Nora-
Becky exchanges as examples.]  
> 

Valky:
Well I definitely agree with that SSSusan, (I personally Loved Nora 
and Betsys exchange recently, which I couldn't help joining because 
I was enjoying it so much.) And I have started to realise that Kathy 
probably didn't mean to label or judge those exchanges harshly, 
either. As to cross purposes I think you are spot on there Susan, I 
do have to admit that my position does include recognising even 
those exchanges as a contributor to excess volume, but I tried very 
hard to make the point that I really **don't** want them gone 
because of that. But rather that I personally want to take the side 
of looking at options that extend in the direction of positive 
building to accommodate them better.

SSSusan:
> However, there *is* another type of two- or three-person exchange 
which gets tiresome and which serves primarily only to add to list 
volume, and that's Geoff's aptly-named "tennis exchange."  
> 

Valky:
I see this point and I recognise that there are good reasons to 
discourage it somewhat, not least of all that it has a tendency to 
heat emotions on the list. OTOH there isn't really any ideal ruling 
of management that will ever work IMO without also affecting the 
conributors to the more meaty exchanges, and that, essentially, is 
my main objection.