Guest guest Posted January 11, 2004 Report Share Posted January 11, 2004 I agree! Chris In a message dated 1/11/04 10:24:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, bberg@... writes: > Someone wrote: [Nothing, but (s)he quoted a several-hundred-line post to > make up for it] > > I'm not picking on anyone in particular (hence the name-dropping and/or > lack thereof), but could I ask that people restrict the back-patting, > thank-yous, and me-toos to private, off-list e-mail? There are hundreds > of posts sent to this list every week (there have been about 900 in > January alone), and it's hard enough to sort through those that actually > say something, so I think I speak for most of us when I say that I can > do without those that don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2004 Report Share Posted January 11, 2004 Someone wrote: [Nothing, but (s)he quoted a several-hundred-line post to make up for it] I'm not picking on anyone in particular (hence the name-dropping and/or lack thereof), but could I ask that people restrict the back-patting, thank-yous, and me-toos to private, off-list e-mail? There are hundreds of posts sent to this list every week (there have been about 900 in January alone), and it's hard enough to sort through those that actually say something, so I think I speak for most of us when I say that I can do without those that don't. Berg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2004 Report Share Posted January 11, 2004 << Someone wrote: [Nothing, but (s)he quoted a several-hundred-line post to > make up for it] > > I'm not picking on anyone in particular (hence the name-dropping and/or > lack thereof), but could I ask that people restrict the back-patting, > thank-yous, and me-toos to private, off-list e-mail? There are hundreds of >> I know that i have asked, pleaded more than once for some basic editing to no avail. Most lists ask for a basic quoiting of a couple of lines. Those of us on digest really get drowned in junk. I know that i dump most digests due to unreadabilty. Trying to decipher all the stuff doesn't work and so those of us on digest just don't read most of the posts. We just delete it unread. Anyone that has not been on digest needs to spend a couple of weeks there!! Kathy A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2004 Report Share Posted January 12, 2004 That's exactly why I don't do digest. With individual emails I can sort by subject and delete the subjects that don't interest me, skim the rest, deleting as I go and then reading the ones that I find most interesting. That's why I prefer the response to a message to be at the top. I can read the response, and if I wish to know what they are responding to I can scroll down to it. I have tossed many messages because I did not have the time to scroll to bottom of the well to find the message. Judith Alta -----Original Message----- << Someone wrote: [Nothing, but (s)he quoted a several-hundred-line post to > make up for it] > > I'm not picking on anyone in particular (hence the name-dropping and/or > lack thereof), but could I ask that people restrict the back-patting, > thank-yous, and me-toos to private, off-list e-mail? There are hundreds of >> I know that i have asked, pleaded more than once for some basic editing to no avail. Most lists ask for a basic quoiting of a couple of lines. Those of us on digest really get drowned in junk. I know that i dump most digests due to unreadabilty. Trying to decipher all the stuff doesn't work and so those of us on digest just don't read most of the posts. We just delete it unread. Anyone that has not been on digest needs to spend a couple of weeks there!! Kathy A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2004 Report Share Posted January 12, 2004 In a message dated 1/12/04 5:43:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, jopollack2001@... writes: > However, it's an > easy job, because eveyone knows to snip! Jo, What is the definition of snipping? I noticed you quoted the automatic list signature giving subscribing directions, etc, as they appeared in Kathy's post so that they appeared twice in yours... Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2004 Report Share Posted January 12, 2004 Kathy I'm not a digest reader, but have noticed lots of people don't snip their posts, and on a list this busy, I would never go to digest purely for that reason. As a moderator on a couple of other lists, my main responsibility is the slapping of wrists for non-snippage. Regular repeat offenders get put on moderated status to prevent unsnipped posts getting through, but I think we've only ever put one person on moderated for this, and one other got a serious warning and then started snipping. However, it's an easy job, because eveyone knows to snip! Jo --- Kathy <kacheson@...> wrote: > > I know that i have asked, pleaded more than once for > some basic editing to > no avail. Most lists ask for a basic quoiting of a > couple of lines. Those > of us on digest really get drowned in junk. I > know that i dump most > digests due to unreadabilty. Trying to decipher all > the stuff doesn't work > and so those of us on digest just don't read most of > the posts. We just > delete it unread. Anyone that has not been on digest > needs to spend a couple > of weeks there!! > > > Kathy A. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2004 Report Share Posted January 12, 2004 --- ChrisMasterjohn@... wrote: > > Jo, > > What is the definition of snipping? I noticed you > quoted the automatic list > signature giving subscribing directions, etc, as > they appeared in Kathy's post > so that they appeared twice in yours... > Erm, just testing! ;-) Jo ________________________________________________________________________ Messenger - Communicate instantly... " Ping " your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger./download/index.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2004 Report Share Posted January 12, 2004 <<I'm not a digest reader, but have noticed lots of people don't snip their posts, and on a list this busy, I would never go to digest purely for that reason>> Wow. I am on several lists that are high volume. If i got them all as single posts i would have virtually 100's everyday. When i get a digest that is really junked up i just toss it. With this list due to topics i am not interested in and the non snipping problems i only really read or see it about 30% of the time. Kathy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 2004 Report Share Posted January 18, 2004 <<In many email clients, it is pretty easy to set up a separate folder for each list, so that even if you receive them individually, they all go to one folder and don't clutter your inbox. Superhero Bush Rescues Marriage >> Could be - don't know and really have no desire to do it. Doesn't that come down to accommodating those who don't give a rip and have no desire nor reason to change? Could that be called self centered? Common courtesy dictates that you look beyond yourself and TRIM your posts. There is a lot i could learn form this list but if " the few " can't get their heads out of the clouds and think about what they are doing then i have no problem with moving on to something more congenial. Kathy A. who is not into pointless head banging Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 <I would generally agree. But it could be laziness or ignorance or a host of other things as well which is why I mentioned my ideas for posting as suggestions, not command from Mt. Sinai. > Laziness is not an excuse. Ignorance is or could be but still wouldn't be an excuse forever. Yes, your post had good suggestions. <<Nonetheless my comments to you had nothing to do with trimming posts. I already stated my piece about the subject in an earlier message about posting>> I was thinking that when you posted it (last week) that it was in connection with the trimming posts topic? <shrug>. You post on low content and separate folders just showed up again yesterday when i happened to get 2 digests in day that were useless. So, I had just sent a post about trimming when i then read " low content " post and i was still on a rant. <<another how you do it, but I was just offering a suggestion in case the sheer volume was the main reason you were in digest mode. If not, then just ignore what I said.>> Thanks for your suggestions and trying to help Kathy A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 > In a message dated 1/19/04 2:00:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, > heidis@t... writes: > > > Could we maybe just vote on this? I'm willing to do either -- > > I don't mind scrolling, I don't mind top-reading -- but > > it would be nice to have an " agreed on standard " so > > I don't feel guilty ... > > We could, but if we vote for top-posting I'm not going to do > it. Neither will I. I'm from the old Usenet school of quoting only what is being responded to and posting the response immediately below the quote being addressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.