Re: radsafe partitioning

[rfong@snd10.med.navy.mil (LCDR Fong)]

I CONCUR!



>As a new subscriber to the Radsafe mailing list, I have been overwhelmed not
>only by the large volume of daily mail, but by the diversity of its scope as
>well.   Although there may be others with sufficient time and broad range of
>interests to digest all of this material, I find too much on the daily
>mailing of no interest to me, and despite my largely retired status, I have
>better things to do with my time than to peruse postings which are of no
>interest to me.
>
>I am requesting (through the proper channel) that I receive the digest -
>which I hope will be a briefer version of the current postings - to see if
>that helps me better use my time.  However, I would strongly urge that the
>RADSAFE mailing list be considered for partitioning into separate subject
>areas, to one or more of which individuals with narrower interests (and
>restricted time) could subscribe. One sample breakdown might resemble the
>following:
>
>- Regulation, regulatory policy
>- Radioisotope/medical health physics
>- Reactor health physics
>- Dosimetry and instrumentation
>- Environmental radiation/transport modeling
>- Waste management and disposal
>- Radiobiology
>- Instrumentation
>- etc., etc.,..
>
>I would be interested to learn if this (or a similar) reaction has been
>experienced by other subscribers.  It seems to me that if use of this
>function grows as the overall Internet use is growing, the mail will soon
>become totally overwhelming - and the need for a partitioning of interest
>areas will be needed sooner or later. 
>
>MortGold@aol.com (Mort Goldman)
>
>
>