Filter neuroscience group

Richard Hall rhall at
Tue Oct 15 13:14:21 EST 1996

>In article <53vn9t$obv at>,
>   R.H.Arnott at (Robert Arnott) wrote:
>Dear All,
>Is it possible to filter posts to this group?

I oppose filtering the neuroscience group for several reasons:

1. It has been an active and interesting newsgroup in part because of the
diversity of participants.  Who can forget the weighty deliberations about
why eating ice cream causes headaches?  Many of the lay requests for
information have been more informative than some of the professional

2. I selectively filter with command delete.  This does not address the
problem of cost to readers using commercial links to the net, but the net
has provided preferential service to education and govertment entities from
day one. While I welcome increased access to scientific newsgroups and
regret the expense incurred by some, it is an expense that many seem
willing to pay.

3. Several individuals have worn thin their welcome. Unless they are
absolutely nuts, they eventually drop from the group.  Our most recent
tirades seem to be approaching flame out.  Converely, some of our highly
qualified neuroscientists have not always handled things well and sometimes
have inadvertently fanned the flames.

We need to be open to diverse input, restrained in our criticism, and
tolerant of human failings. But we do not need filters...besides who would
be willing to take such onerous task?


Richard Hall
Comparative Animal Physiologist
Division of Sciences and Mathematics
University of the Virgin Islands
St. Thomas, USVI  00802

rhall at

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list