Having retired somewhat hurt from the fray and some of the personal invective that was being aimed at me I'd like to put this forward for comment. It's from the Manual of Air Traffic Services (CAP493) Part 1, 5.2.2
I think it does justify my original suggestion to some extent.
++++
A NOTAM is normally originated when urgent information of an operational nature
needs to be distributed rapidly.Parochial information which can be imparted locally to
operators and which will not preclude safe operation of a flight,or influence a decision
by aircrew on possible diversion requirements,should not be promulgated by NOTAM.
Items which come into this category include the following:
a)Routine maintenance work on aprons and taxiways which does not affect the safe
movement of aircraft;
b)Runway marking work,when aircraft operations can safely be conducted on other
available runways or the equipment used can be removed as necessary;
c)Temporary obstructions close to the aerodrome that do not affect the safe
operation of aircraft;
d)Partial failure of aerodrome lighting facilities where such failure does not affect
aircraft operation;e)Partial failure of air-ground communications when suitable alternative frequencies
are known to be available and are operative;
f)The lack of apron marshalling services or road traffic control;
g)The unserviceability of location,destination or other instruction signs on the
aircraft movement areas;
h)Parachuting in Class F or G airspace under VFR or when controlled at promulgated
sites or within danger or prohibited areas;
i)Other information of a similar nature.
+++++
I appreciate that as a pilot and a PPL at that I am stepping into the lion's den and have already had my head bitten off in no uncertain manner by some of you, who are I assume ATC professionals.
Perhaps my original post was not worded as well as it could have been - if you were offended then I apologise, that was not my intent.
Mike