Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 16:08:09 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nsmain.microman.net ([63.169.36.141] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b9) with SMTP id 1830003 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 16:04:36 -0400 Received: from rbevans (adsl-65-42-41-86.dsl.sfldmi.ameritech.net [65.42.41.86]) by nsmain.microman.net (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID# 0-55505U700L200S0V35) with SMTP id net for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 16:06:07 -0400 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 16:17:48 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <01C2752F.918ACA60.RBEvans@eiihq.com> From: rbevans@eiihq.com (Bob Evans) Reply-To: "RBEvans@eiihq.com" X-Original-To: "'lml@lancaironline.net'" Subject: ivp tsio550 splitting the list X-Original-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 16:17:46 -0400 Organization: Evans Industries X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am in favor of splitting the list. I have been flying a IVP for two years and although I am sure that there is much to be learned from all of the contributions to the list they are usually not relevant to me. More particularly I don't want to spend the time searching for that which is. Further I often don't ask quwstions or make comments regarding flying and owning a IVP because the scope of my interests are so small relative to the scope of the whole List. I think the Idea of having numerous specialized lists and then having an all included list for those with the time and inclination is winner for all. All the best Bob Evans N4TQ