>        Am I missing something here? I feel very lucky not to have put the
>score
>on the subject line of my last post. But I have in the past and I never
>thought it was a legitimate issue that anyone felt passionately about.
>Guess I know differently now.  Personally I liked seeing the scores since
>it gave me a clue as to whether I wanted to read the post or not. But that
>was JMHO.
>
>        If one has to look at their email before watching the VCR, say for
>professional reasons, then one possible solution is to simply not subscribe
>to this list. I haven't subscribed to the list for years, yet I still read
>it regularly and post to it occasionally. All you need is a browser
>bookmarked to the HOCKEY-L archives which are updated almost to the minute.
>In fact, I thought almost everyone was doing it this way these days. Who
>wants their mailbox jammed up with all that mail or the thousands of lines
>of the digest version? Now, if we could just get Wayne, or someone to stack
>the entries in inverse order like he did for the archive titles, life would
>get even better.
 
I really don't understand why someone would unsubscribe because the score
of a game that he was interested about was listed.  If you are that
interested in the game you either watch/listen live or, if that is
impossible, watch/listed on tape/archive.  Why would one peruse Hockey-L
before watching the game?  Sounds like self-persecution to me.
>
>        Personally I think this list is more thoughtful and contains less
>flame
>and bile than the USCHO message board. In fact, the Wildcats seem not to
>know this forum is even here:-):-)
 
There are several Wildcat fans who subscribe or lurk.  I've been doing it
for years and Jim Love has been there since the inception.  But I kind of
resent the implication that the this list is somehow better because we
Wildcat fans are not on it in significant numbers.  Many of us have been
around a long time, have some insights on the game and like to make our
feelings known.  What's wrong with that?  Do we really want a PC list?
 
 Yes, we all come across more strongly
>than we intend occasionally, but such is life. I do think this list should
>perhaps be re-combined with the INFO list as many posts are doubled to
>both. That way there would be room for a separate Women's Hockey list, an
>area which is growing by leaps and bounds and which should have its own
>focus without having to fight through a lot of men's hockey posts.
>
>        FWIW, Charlie, it would be great if you could rejoin us.
 
I don't know Charlie, have never seen one of his posts but methinks there
is a bit of Maine sour grapes in there.  Not everybody likes Shawn Walsh or
how his actions (and those of the school) denigrated  the game.  He should
get over it and just enjoy the sport for what it is.
 
Greg Ambrose
 
 
 
>
>        -- Dick Tuthill
>
>HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
>[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.