Print

Print


--- Jan van Steenbergen <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> I would also help if more people followed Ray
> Brown's example: reply to several
> messages about the same topic in one post. That
> can save lots of bandwidth too.

But only if you're answering to several messages
in the same thread, within the same subject line.
I sort mail by subject line - if it's a thread
that a) I've been involved in or b) a new thread
looks interesting, I keep it and read it.
Otherwise, it gets filed. Ray does a good job at
replying within the subject header; but not
everyone that sends mass replies does (especially
digest responders). If I can't find what I'm
looking for in a digest reply or in one of Ray's
answers, it too gets filed.

And while I commend him for the effort at copying
and pasting - I prefer not to take/waste the time
required to do that. I have a fairly limited time
in which to read and respond to events here. If I
take up a lot of time copying content from here
to an editor then back again as a real message,
then I have less time to do actual reading and
responding.

As for raising the message limit, that probably
wouldn't be a bad idea. There's no reason why
anyone here has to lbaour under the notion that
we _must_ read each and every message in the
queue. Feel free to delete messages or threads as
you please. If what I have to say doesn't
interest you, I won't feel bad if you delete my
messages! If you can pare down the daily
allotment of 100 messages to 30 or 40 of
interest, you'll save a lot of time and have more
time to devote to those interesting topics.

Padraic.


=====
blaženi ništii duxom&#1100; &#283;ko t&#283;x&#1098; est&#1098; c&#283;sar&#1100;stvo nebes&#1100;skoe!
    -- Mt.5:3

--

Ill Bethisad --
<http://www.geocities.com/elemtilas/ill_bethisad>


Come visit The World! --
<http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/>







.