Lynn said, in part ..
>        As for splitting the lists, I also subscribe to several soccer
>mailing lists. The one for Scotland has been split into 2 lists, one for
>results and one for discussion. Since I get both, I don't even notice
>what is posted to what list. I think I've seen that suggestion during the
>short life of HOCKEY, but I wonder how many people would only subscribe
>to a discussion list and not a results list?
 
   I can see two uses for splitting the list.  (1) Some people, using
   their local software (mail user agent), could more easily separate
   results from discussion and thus read the messages in a timely order.
   (2) Some people could subscribe to results without listening to
   discussion.
 
   Are there other reasons?  Is the benefit enough to offset the
   complications of 2 lists?
 
   If only scores, rankings and ratings are included in "results", and
   the timeliness of these summaries is sufficient, then perhaps the
   "results" should be simply in the archive.  If "results" include box
   scores and very timely one-game scores, then the archive doesn't do
   it.
 
   IMHO, the best game reports have a lot of discussion in them.  Are
   all descriptions of games "results" or are some "discussion"?
 
   Here is a problem with splitting HOCKEY-L or using LISTSERV TOPICS.
   Whenever I ask anyone if they will *use* the suggested split, they
   say no, but maybe *someone* will.  I lose interest rapidly.
 
   Let's not fool ourselves into thinking a split in the list will mean
   less mail in our mail box each day.
 
   I don't mean to stop discussion of a list split ...  maybe it should
   be ...  but I haven't seen evidence that it will accomplish any goal.
 
   On the other hand, maybe there is another list that solves some
   problem for a significant number of people.  (If there is, I don't
   know what it is!).  Maybe it is a moderated version of HOCKEY-L or
   HOCKEY-D.  Maybe it is some sort of elitist list where anyone might
   listen, but only a relatively small number of people write).  Maybe
   ...?