<?xml version="1.0" encoding="latin1"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Too much social (even with #noemail )? NYTimes asks in Style</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ibiblio.org/pjones/blog/too-much-social-even-with-noemail-nytimes-asks-in-style/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ibiblio.org/pjones/blog/too-much-social-even-with-noemail-nytimes-asks-in-style/</link>
	<description>Accept no substitutes</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 May 2013 23:06:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Paul</title>
		<link>http://ibiblio.org/pjones/blog/too-much-social-even-with-noemail-nytimes-asks-in-style/comment-page-1/#comment-442363</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:43:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ibiblio.org/pjones/blog/?p=3487#comment-442363</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve never used Outlook so I cannot evaluate it. 

As you will see as you read other postings on this blog, I&quot;m not completely averse to fast communications, rapid responses or even slower delivery through some channels. I just think and know that there are better options -- faster, more interactive, more collaborative, more mobile and easier to slice, dice, and manage. 

I have used 3270 terminals and I have even written the email interfaces for those terminals (TSO and WYLBUR based UCLA-mail in the 80s), but I have no nostalgia for those times. That was merely the best we had then, But that was then and this is now. We have many many choices that assist and enhance our communications streams. Of those email is the worst.

Peace out</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve never used Outlook so I cannot evaluate it. </p>
<p>As you will see as you read other postings on this blog, I&#8221;m not completely averse to fast communications, rapid responses or even slower delivery through some channels. I just think and know that there are better options &#8212; faster, more interactive, more collaborative, more mobile and easier to slice, dice, and manage. </p>
<p>I have used 3270 terminals and I have even written the email interfaces for those terminals (TSO and WYLBUR based UCLA-mail in the 80s), but I have no nostalgia for those times. That was merely the best we had then, But that was then and this is now. We have many many choices that assist and enhance our communications streams. Of those email is the worst.</p>
<p>Peace out</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mbck</title>
		<link>http://ibiblio.org/pjones/blog/too-much-social-even-with-noemail-nytimes-asks-in-style/comment-page-1/#comment-442341</link>
		<dc:creator>mbck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:27:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ibiblio.org/pjones/blog/?p=3487#comment-442341</guid>
		<description>The more I read, the more I understand &quot;no email&quot; to mean &quot;I hate Outlook&quot;. 

What do I like in eCommunications?  Reasonably quick delivery.
What do I dislike in eCommunications? Unreasonable expectations for a quick response.

What I don&#039;t like in email (I mean: SMTP over the Internet), and which is more prevalent on that medium, is SPAM.  There are several ways of controlling that.  I use a combo of CMUSieve and SpamAssassin.  Takes the bulk off of that. The &quot;Susan&quot; service mentioned above would probably be good too.

What I don&#039;t like in alternatives is that they are even more taxing than significant SMTP-over-the-Internet in terms of demands for immediate response (what does &quot;IM&quot; mean after all?).  I read my eMail as I read physical mail - once a day.  My antispam arrangements have filtered most of the nonsense and organized a lot of the rest.  They can because the eMail message is handled by my own box, which can then classify, etc. - I just have to &quot;tell&quot; it once.

All the other choices boil down to wishing that the good old days of 3270 terminals be back.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The more I read, the more I understand &#8220;no email&#8221; to mean &#8220;I hate Outlook&#8221;. </p>
<p>What do I like in eCommunications?  Reasonably quick delivery.<br />
What do I dislike in eCommunications? Unreasonable expectations for a quick response.</p>
<p>What I don&#8217;t like in email (I mean: SMTP over the Internet), and which is more prevalent on that medium, is SPAM.  There are several ways of controlling that.  I use a combo of CMUSieve and SpamAssassin.  Takes the bulk off of that. The &#8220;Susan&#8221; service mentioned above would probably be good too.</p>
<p>What I don&#8217;t like in alternatives is that they are even more taxing than significant SMTP-over-the-Internet in terms of demands for immediate response (what does &#8220;IM&#8221; mean after all?).  I read my eMail as I read physical mail &#8211; once a day.  My antispam arrangements have filtered most of the nonsense and organized a lot of the rest.  They can because the eMail message is handled by my own box, which can then classify, etc. &#8211; I just have to &#8220;tell&#8221; it once.</p>
<p>All the other choices boil down to wishing that the good old days of 3270 terminals be back.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
