I do agree with 2 forum subject column.
Thanks & Regards
L.W.Foo
Process Engineer - Advanced Packages
Foo Loke Whong
Carsem Semiconductor Sdn Bhd
Email id : [log in to unmask]
Phone : + (6 05) 5262333 Ext :530
Fax : + (6 05) 5265333
> ----------
> From: Clavius Chin[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To: (Leadfree Electronics Assembly Forum);Clavius Chin
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 9:26 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [LF] AW: [LF] Clarification on Leadfree Listserve
> question
>
> Hi,
> I also agree to have two forums.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Clavius Chin
>
>
>
>
> "Romm, Doug" <[log in to unmask]>@IPC.ORG> on 16/08/2001 17:25:18
>
> Please respond to "(Leadfree Electronics Assembly Forum)"
> <[log in to unmask]>; Please respond to "Romm, Doug" <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Sent by: Leadfree <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> cc:
>
> Subject: Re: [LF] AW: [LF] Clarification on Leadfree Listserve question
>
>
>
>
> Edward,
>
> First, thanks for the feedback. I don't know if all responders have
> copied
> the entire forum but thus far here's what I've received:
>
> In favor of my proposal: 3
> Not in favor of my proposal: 3
>
> Second, please read through my suggestion again. I am not suggesting to
> split the forum. I am suggesting to 'add' another forum specifically for
> the intent of holding the debate on viability, need, merit, etc of the
> lead-free movement. Those that believe lead-free should not happen and
> continue to debate the issue can do so on the new, proposed forum. They
> can still subscribe to the current forum. Those of us on the current
> forum
> who have no interest in the recurring debate messages would not subscribe
> to the new, proposed forum.
>
> Third, no, my whole interest is not in fluxes, solder pastes, stencils,
> and
> IR profiles. Please re-read my statement where I say :
>
> 'The first forum (original) could continue with technical discussion about
> lead-free progress, political updates on lead-free, environmental inputs
> that will affect timing of lead-free conversion, etc. This would meet the
> need of many forum subscribers who are actively working on implementing
> lead-free processes, materials development, etc.'
>
> My proposal in a nutshell is to simply allow the forum members who are
> against the lead-free movement to continue to debate the issue on the
> separate, new, proposed forum.
>
> I have spoken with several other forum subscribers off-line who agree with
> a separate forum for the 'debate'. They are moving forward with plans to
> implement lead-free processes and products. No, they don't have blinders
> on (my opinion). But they believe the lead-free conversion will continue
> to progress and they're working towards implementing processes and
> products.
>
> This is the end of my discussion on the proposal I have made. I'm not
> going to 'debate' my proposal about a forum for 'lead-free debate'. I
> appreciate your feedback. Respectfully, I will decline further discussion
> on this proposal.
>
>
> Regards, Doug romm
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edward Szpruch [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 11:15 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [LF] AW: [LF] Clarification on Leadfree Listserve question
>
> Marc,Doug,
> I vote against.
> I think this is mistake to split between "why" and "how". Really your
> whole
> interest in this forum is limited to fluxes,soldering pastes,stensils and
> IR
> profiles ?
> Edward
>
> Edward Szpruch
> Eltek , Manager of Process Engineering
> P.O.Box 159 ; 49101 Petah Tikva Israel
> Tel ++972 3 9395050 , Fax ++972 3 9309581
> e-mail [log in to unmask]
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dittes Marc (CPD AIT PGP) [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: a aaaane 16 2001 16:26
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: [LF] AW: [LF] Clarification on Leadfree Listserve question
> >
> > Great idea!
> > I would not restrict the second forum to people that believe lead-free
> is
> > a
> > bad thing since then they think that only this position exists, but a
> > split
> > would be beneficial to all.
> >
> > Marc Dittes
> >
> > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Romm, Doug [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Gesendet am: Donnerstag, 16. August 2001 16:09
> > An: [log in to unmask]
> > Betreff: [LF] Clarification on Leadfree Listserve question
> >
> >
> >
> > I suggest the current lead-free forum be broken into the following 2
> > separate forums:
> >
> > **.lead-free.progress
> > **.lead-free.debaters
> >
> > The second forum above (new) would be for those current forum members
> who
> > prefer to steer every conversation towards 'why lead-free is wrong and
> > should not be pursued'. The 'debate' forum would exist specifically for
> > those who believe lead-free is a bad thing and espouse that anyone who
> > pursues or even discusses lead-free advances is misguided.
> >
> > The first forum (original) could continue with technical discussion
> about
> > lead-free progress, political updates on lead-free, environmental inputs
> > that will affect timing of lead-free conversion, etc. This would meet
> the
> > need of many forum subscribers who are actively working on implementing
> > lead-free processes, materials development, etc. Forum members who
> happen
> > to believe that lead-free 'will happen' (right or wrong), prefer not to
> > receive continual debate e-mail on the issue, and would still like to
> stay
> > up will all other advancements or developments on lead-free could then
> > continue on the current forum. Those current members who prefer to
> > continually debate the viability, reasoning, etc of the lead-free
> movement
> > could subscribe to both the current forum and the new 'debaters' forum.
> > On
> > the new 'debaters' forum they would be free to vent their frustration
> with
> > the lead-free movement and those forum members who are attempting to
> > implement lead-free processes.
> >
> > This type of approach would allow each forum member to 'choose' whether
> or
> > not they prefer to receive the forum posts concerning 'debate' of the
> > lead-free movement. Those who don't prefer to receive all of the
> 'debate'
> > postings would simply not sign-up to that forum.
> >
> > It seems like a fairly straightforward solution is to set up a 'debate'
> > forum for those who prefer to continue the debate.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Doug Romm
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Charbonneau, Richard A [ mailto:[log in to unmask]
> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> ]
> > Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 4:17 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [LF] Clarification on Leadfree Listserve question
> >
> >
> > Hi Jack,
> >
> > I don't see a problem either way. There is precedence for "dibbing-up"
> > the
> > subject matter (all one needs to do is to look at the newsgroups). For
> > example, I subscribe to 5 newsgroups in "rec.audio" category as follows.
> >
> > rec.audio.high-end
> > rec.audio.marketplace
> > rec.audio.misc
> > rec.audio.opinion
> > rec.audio.pro
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian Ellis [ mailto:[log in to unmask]
> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> ]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 2:46 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [LF] Clarification on Leadfree Listserve question
> >
> >
> > Jack
> >
> > In industry, we have a great tendency to compartmentalise issues, even
> > creating "hermetic empires" within companies in the hopes that a
> > department will become "indispensable". This often leads to internecine
> > wars between the departments. Today, we are beginning to realise the
> > futility of this. Concurrent engineering is just one manifestation of
> > this increasing intelligence. Modern technical specs which no longer say
> > that thou shalt use such-and-such type of flux and thou shalt clean the
> > residues with so-and-so type of solvent (and may all the devils from
> > hell descend on you if you dare deviate from this by one jot!) are
> > another. There is still a compartimentalisation manifest in the fields
> > of sustainability, where we must take a "cradle-to-grave" approach. As a
> > member of the Executive Team of the IEE Professional Network on
> > Engineering for a Sustainable Future, I appeal to you not to
> > compartimentalise this issue. Please allow us to take a holistic
> > approach which must, by definition, look at ALL the issues involved as
> > one subject, be they technical, commercial, environmental, economic,
> > political and, yes, even emotional. We, on this planet, are human beings
> > and we have feelings. I feel that separation of technical issues from
> > the rest will degrade the holistic approach. There is a risk it will set
> > the techies apart from the rest, in their little "empire" or, at least,
> > an ivory tower where they can feel isolated from the real world that we
> > have on loan for future generations.
> >
> > In addition, how on earth can you guarantee that the "Technical LF" will
> > not evolve the same way as the current one has? This started out
> > essentially as technical and then subscribers began to realise that many
> > other issues were involved and started to say so. It would only need one
> > person to suggest in the technical forum that, e.g., a lead-free alloy
> > with n% of thallium is a perfect drop-in substitute for Sn63 when it
> > would all start again.
> >
> > Finally, Jack, I think that most of the subscribers to this forum are
> > "techies" (scientists, engineers and technicians). I do not like the
> > idea of discrimination between narrow-minded ones who can see only what
> > is directly in front of their noses and have no interest in the broader
> > issues and those who already have a broader view. Is not this a form of
> > class distinction?
> >
> > Please, Jack, don't!
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> >
> > -----
> > Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
> in
> > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
> > To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET
> > Leadfree NOMAIL
> > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases
> >
> >
> > E-mail Archives
> > Please visit IPC web site ( http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm
> > <http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm> ) for additional
> > information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700
> > ext.5315
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> >
> > -----
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> > -----
> > Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
> in
> > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
> > To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET
> > Leadfree NOMAIL
> > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases
> >
> > E-mail Archives
> > Please visit IPC web site ( http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm
> > <http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm> ) for additional
> > information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700
> > ext.5315
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> > -----
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------
> > Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
> in
> > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
> > To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET
> > Leadfree NOMAIL
> > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases
> >
> > E-mail Archives
> > Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for
> > additional
> > information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700
> > ext.5315
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
>
> Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
> To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
> the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
> To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET
> Leadfree NOMAIL
> Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases >
> E-mail Archives
> Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for
> additional
> information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700
> ext.5315
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
> Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
> To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
> the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
> To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET
> Leadfree NOMAIL
> Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases >
> E-mail Archives
> Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for
> additional
> information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700
> ext.5315
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
