> If I may ask, was there any reason to *consider* curtailing at all?
The only "consideration" is that Bapa Rao opined that these communications
are of a "personal"/"semi-personal" nature, directed at a limited set
of people, and not to SCIT, which is an open, unbounded community. In
TELUSA, we know the number of members, where as on SCIT, there is absolutrely
no way of knowing that. Is that a fair statement?
It is not that "there was a reason to consider curtailing", but that
putting all these communications out in the open was really done
without any deliberation.
I like the way you put it that the "Web has the beauty of public access,
yet the restriction that it is not a two-way discussion forum." However,
once someone accesses this information, there is no way of preventing
from "responding", even though the communication wasn't addressed to
them.
I am not sure how important these arguments are.
Ramakrishna
PS: ee post-lO modaTi vAkyamu TELUSA members andarikI teliyadu, pharavA lEdu.
That sentence is addressed only to DSR.