Re: test - other lists ?


Jay Scheevel
 

I agree. If you go back to the old Jimmy Masal printed page days, I would read the whole Q-talk, no matter the type that was being discussed. I think the same philosophy still exists here. Any Q-type and occationally a Dragonfly related topic are of interest to all of us. I think having the separate lists got too granular with most people who have useful insight only reading the main list.

 

Jay

 

From: Tri-Q@Q-List.groups.io <Tri-Q@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2021 7:05 AM
To: Tri-Q@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Tri-Q] test - other lists ?

 

Sounds good to me Sammy.  Just as well let it go if no one is interested in the performance list.

Bruce



On Feb 1, 2021, at 4:30 AM, Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@...> wrote:



The Q-performance list is all but useless.

 

There a few posts on the Q-1 list, but not much. 

 

I don't really see any value in maintaining those two subgroups if no one uses them. 

 

Sam 

 

On Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 12:27 PM Richard Gammon <gamzoom@...> wrote:

Is everybody now using Quickie or Q performance lists ?

R

 

Join Tri-Q@Q-List.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.