test - other lists ?


Richard Gammon
 

Is everybody now using Quickie or Q performance lists ?

R


Sam Hoskins
 

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


Bruce Crain
 

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




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

 


Richard Thomson
 

Perhaps its just lacking performance ? :-)

I agree, usually just  look at the summary on the main list, never  think to go there.

Rich T

On 01/02/2021 11:30, 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