Message-ID: <6694@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 20-Dec-84 13:52:44 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.6694
Posted: Thu Dec 20 13:52:44 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 23-Dec-84 00:15:47 EST
Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 36

Dave:

I'm glad you found my question "interesting", since I was a bit unsure
that I had addressed it to the correct audience.  I believe that the
exchange of such technical information is of great value to those in
need, and of some interest to those who, like me, are blessed (?) with
an insatiable appetite for technical detail.

Still, the readership of this List, like that of most others, has a
broad range of needs, interests, and technical experience.  This
disparity is actually a blessing, because the novices have an
opportunity to learn from the discussions of wizards, and the dedicated
CP/M hackers get to hear what the rest of us *really* want.

Thus, I would hate to be the cause of a mass exodus of INFO-CPM readers
who cannot tolerate even one more letter about faster DMA on someone's
SuperZippy XYZ-4999 computer.  It seems to be the nature of electronic
mail that an individual's tolerance for irrelevant messages is
primarily a function of his terminal line speed and his mail or BBoard
system's facility in skipping unwanted information.  In deference to
those readers stuck with /bin/mail at 300 baud, I therefore offered to
summarize the responses to my question, possibly in a single message to
the List.  While this means more work for me, it still provides
everyone with the information, eliminates redundant messages, and
allows those uninterested to leap over the entire discussion in a
single keystroke.

Comments?

				Paul G. Milazzo 
				Dept. of Computer Science
				Rice University, Houston, TX

P.S.   I take the sentiment recently expressed to mean that if nothing
       else, I should certainly send in a summary of responses (should
       any ever appear :-).