Re: Funding for Open Access Publication Fees

["Tony McSean" <tmcsean@hollar.co.uk>]

Well I've just sent a survey on the WHO's Global Health Library 
to c8,000 destinations throughout the health library world.  I 
reckon this may only be 5-6,000 people, some of whom will have 
received it 5 times or more.  I agree with you for the most part 
that the hackneyed "Apologies for cross-posting" phrase has 
become verbal chaff, but think that if you are shotgunning out a 
mailing (for reasons that you think are fine) it is polite to 
include a brief explanation of why the ether suddenly seems to be 
boiling with this one message.

Only takes a minute to write a few words of explanation and maybe 
if irritable people are mollified they will be more likely to 
reply.  Mind you, that theory didn't seem to work in this case.

Tony

Tony McSean
+41 22 791 3539

______________

From: B.G. Sloan [mailto:bgsloan2@yahoo.com]
To: david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk, liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Sent: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 02:51:01 +0100
Subject: Re: Funding for Open Access Publication Fees

Just curious . . . why do people still say "Apologies for 
cross-posting"

There are so many lists these days, and there is so much
interdisciplinarity, that it's probably rare that there is only
one list that a posting could be sent to.

I stopped apologizing for cross-posting at least ten years ago 
and no one has complained to me directly.

Bernie Sloan