And.... Thanks to all for a very interesting and and entertaining 2003.

Back to lurk mode.

--

My mind not only wanders, sometimes it leaves completely.

Rich

All outgoing mail is scanned for viruses by Norton Antivirus.

"Rich" wrote in message
...
And.... Thanks to all for a very interesting and and entertaining
2003.

Back to lurk mode.

--

.... thanks for the comments: a thought - does anyone have an idea of the
ratio of 'lurker' to non? Is there a Usenet rule-of-thumb for this sort
of thing?

And a Happy New Year from me too ....

Martin.


--
FAQ & Glossary for uk.sci.weather at:-
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/booty.weather/uswfaqfr.htm

In article ,
Martin Rowley writes:

"Rich" wrote in message
...
And.... Thanks to all for a very interesting and and entertaining
2003.

Back to lurk mode.


... thanks for the comments:

Echoed.

a thought - does anyone have an idea of the
ratio of 'lurker' to non? Is there a Usenet rule-of-thumb for this sort
of thing?

10-1 is often quoted, but I suspect that it's no better than guesswork,
since I can't see any way that the number of lurkers can be estimated. I
suspect that the ratio is actually much smaller than 10-1, since I can't
imagine that many people having the willpower to read a group but never
post to it. After all, if you never post then you miss a lot of the fun.

And a Happy New Year from me too ....

And a Happy New Year to everyone from me.
--
John Hall

"Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong."
Oscar Wilde

John Hall wrote:

a thought - does anyone have an idea of the
ratio of 'lurker' to non? Is there a Usenet rule-of-thumb for this sort
of thing?


10-1 is often quoted, but I suspect that it's no better than guesswork,
since I can't see any way that the number of lurkers can be estimated. I
suspect that the ratio is actually much smaller than 10-1, since I can't
imagine that many people having the willpower to read a group but never
post to it. After all, if you never post then you miss a lot of the fun.

And a Happy New Year from me too ....


And a Happy New Year to everyone from me.

hmmm, well I almost entirely lurk - because I dont usually have anything
useful to say. I have learned a lot lurking here.

Happy New Year all

Sarah H

In article ,
SarahH writes:
hmmm, well I almost entirely lurk - because I dont usually have
anything useful to say.

That doesn't stop most people, myself included.

I can only commend your self-restraint.

I have learned a lot lurking here.

Glad to hear it.
--
John Hall

"Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong."
Oscar Wilde

"John Hall" wrote in message
...

a thought - does anyone have an idea of the
ratio of 'lurker' to non? Is there a Usenet rule-of-thumb for this sort
of thing?

10-1 is often quoted, but I suspect that it's no better than guesswork,
since I can't see any way that the number of lurkers can be estimated. I
suspect that the ratio is actually much smaller than 10-1, since I can't
imagine that many people having the willpower to read a group but never
post to it. After all, if you never post then you miss a lot of the fun.

I suffer from a willpower problem to, but perhaps you and I are just weak
willed and the iron souled individuals reading this just sneer and move on?

Jim Webster

"SarahH" wrote in message
...
John Hall wrote:

hmmm, well I almost entirely lurk - because I dont usually have anything
useful to say.

If everyone else thought like that the usenet would be awful quiet :-))

Happy new year

Jim Webster