Re: Check the update from Microsoft.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 09:24:56PM -0600, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> Then there is also the time-honored usenet practice of requesting
> that all replies be directed to the original poster, who will then
> post a summary of the replies at a later date.
Not sure how time honored that is anymore. Seems a lot of people do
it then convienently forget to post a summary. I generally discourage
people from responding off-list to an on-topic, on-list request for
help. Too many people have decided that they don't have to
participate in the community to reap it's benefits, this behaviour
kills communities.
> Don't forget that what I'm calling a Bad Idea here is the suggestion
> that the list manager remove sender addresses from list messages. If
> it does so, you can't copy someone's email address and send a direct
> reply because it is no longer present to be copied.
And people wonder why I consider munging harmful on places like
slashdot or Usenet. First time I need to make a private response to
someone and can't on Usenet, they go into the bozo bin permanently.
http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful/
> Digests reduce the number of messages received, but do not make it
> any easier to find the one or two replies to your question that may
> or may not exist within the hundreds of total posts to the list.
> (Actually, I suspect they would make it harder, since threading
> generally does not work with digests.)
That's when you save the digest as a mailbox, though I think Mutt
might thread digests in-digest. I've always found it far easier to
just let the information flow.
- --
.''`. Baloo Ursidae <baloo@ursine.dyndns.org>
: :' : proud Debian admin and user
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fix a system
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+eXBnJ5vLSqVpK2kRAnodAJ40PAxEQrJDeU36ar7qBdpV9RgrgACffy/9
1dPyyJzo9AIqPuMzG7lLHx8=
=yCD1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: