Re: Lurkers

pbrown@polaris.umuc.edu writes:
>You're not the first, meseems, to read some kind of objection
>in Dan's post. There are over 200 subscribed addresses (~215),
>perhaps 50 of which might be recognised as regulars. I think
>Dan posed an honest and reasonable question: Why do the other
>125 of you (accounting for those of us multiply subscribed)
>not say anything? Even if we never hear another peep from them,
>it will have been a successful thread, since we now know why a
>few of them lurk here of all places. What I don't understand is
>why so many seem to think that Dan in some way "objects" to
>lurkers or in any way disparages them or their lurkage.
well, Dan's message did get a few to say at least something. I didnt see
it as an objection either. I saw it as an honest question asking why the
lurkers just lurk. No shame in lurking.

Anyway, i do post probably at least once a week. I'm not as prolific as
some are, however. I cant keep up with the heavy threads on theories, or
grammar, but I do skim through the posts.


________________________________________________

 The rattan basket criticizes the palm leaf basket, still both are full of
holes.