Re: ADMIN: Parasitism


Correction:you ARE NOT impelled

----- Original Message -----
From: "A. Premo" <armprem@...>
To: <STMFC@...>
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2006 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] ADMIN: Parasitism

For what it is worth;There are many members of this group who may be at
the entry level of the hobby.Many lack the background of the more
experienced hobbyist.For the advancement of the hobby I think we should all
strive to assist the neophyte whenever possible . There is still much that I
have yet to learn about specific prototypes.I look upon this group as sort
of a fellowship,a fraternity if you will.As Mike said,you impelled to
respond to a question.Armand Premo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Brock" <brockm@...>
To: <STMFC@...>
Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2006 11:52 PM
Subject: [STMFC] ADMIN: Parasitism

From time to time the subject as recently titled "Parasitism" seems to
its way into discussion on the STMFC. As has been mentioned by others,
of us has a copy of every reference book associated with the subject of
group...or others. Given that, it is likely that most of us have, from
to time, asked for help. A problem I run into relatively often is...where
the info that I'm seeking in the stuff I do have? The magazine index is
extremely valuable, of course, but it doesn't have everything AND the
may not be of much use. For example, I know I saw a photo in a long ago
Trains Magazine of a pushing contest on the Milw Road in which an
articulated steam engine and an electric engine were attempting to push
against each other to see who had the most tractive effort and adhesion [
the electic engine won, BTW ]. would one look that up?

I suppose I view the issue somewhat like with the US Constitution's First
Amendment. Free speech. Within certain limitations, you can generally say
what you wish. And now for Brock's Amendment. "I don't have to listen".
point one should be offended by someone asking for help on a
subject. At the same time, no one in the STMFC is obligated to respond.
no one should be offended by the reply...or non reply. Some replies can
necessarily be a bit complex or they might be missleading. Hence, it might
be better to indicate where the info lies. Note the STMFC rule:

"It should be noted that discussions by the group's members
includes questions and answers regarding the group's subject. However, it
should also be noted that the group is not to be considered necessarily as
library with its members prepared to respond to questions or acting as
sources for information. Such responses are entirely voluntary and at no
time is any group member obligated to respond to a request for
In fact, the group is not a good vehicle to transmit large amounts of
information. The group is a good vehicle, however, to provide guidance as
where a member might find information."

An interesting example occurred recently on another group. The rather
question was..."Was UP 4-8-4 #833 and oil burner or coal burner?" The
response is...both. However, there is much more to it because the
is intertested in modeling the engine with a brass model. To avoid
missleading the questioner, a detailed response would be
required...IMO...also requiring research for validation. I didn't have
to do an adequate job so I did not respond [ maybe later ]. Incidentally,
responding to such questions can be rewarding and fun. It can also be a
learning project. If one has the time.

Mike Brock

Yahoo! Groups Links

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.15.9/571 - Release Date: 12/5/2006
11:50 AM

Yahoo! Groups Links

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.15.9/571 - Release Date: 12/5/2006 11:50 AM

Join { to automatically receive all group messages.