[bksvol-discuss] Re: OT Off-topic conversations
- From: "Jake Brownell" <jabrown@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 20:07:08 -0500
Hey Cindy and Sarah,
I do something very similar. I always read all mail from lists and then
reply as needed. I think quite a bit of volume would be cut down if folks
would read all the way through their inboxes before posting superfluous
responses. Another thing I sometimes try and do is wait a few hours or a day
to respond to someone's question if I am not totally positive of the answer.
I would rather see if someone else might post a better alternative than the
one I am going to.
The last attempt I try and do is, if I am replying to a message posted more
than two or three days old, I write directly to the sender. By then most of
the list has moved on and replying to a message that isn't recent on list
just usually doesn't make sense.
Jake
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cindy" <popularplace@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 6:45 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: OT Off-topic conversations
> Good idea, Sarah. When I was getting the list in
> digest form, I put my responses on a separate Word
> file until I'd read all the posts in the digest. Then
> I copied my response with the appropriate subject line
> onto separate posts to the list, because I had asked
> people found that easier to read than a string of
> responses in one post.
>
> Now that I get the posts separately, I don't answer
> right away (usually) but hit "Next," saving the post
> (as with this one of yours), and read all the rest. If
> other people have responded, I don't, unless I have
> something extra to add. Otherwise, I go back to the
> saved post (like now) and reply.
>
> Cindy
>
>
> -- Sarah Van Oosterwijck <curiousentity@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm not against a little extra discussion, but I'm
> > getting a bit over
> > welmed as well. My suggestion for cutting down on
> > postings just a little
> > is for everyone to read all messages they have
> > recieved before posting
> > replies. That way all points on a particular toppic
> > that they want to
> > mention can be compiled in one comprehensive
> > message. There is no need to
> > reply to each individual that writes to you
> > separately, and if you should
> > want to do so, please write to them directly off
> > list. You will be able to
> > find their address if you look in the properties of
> > the message.
> >
> > I do understand that if you keep up with your mail
> > you will send a message
> > and immediately get another you wish to reply to at
> > times. That's okay.
> > We just don't need 50 messages saying the same thing
> > from almost everyone
> > on the list ranging in times from immediately to
> > days and days later. That
> > is unless the messages are basically an unofficial
> > servay in which case the
> > number of messages saying the same thing is the
> > whole point. :-)
> >
> > Also, please, try to remember to remove the OT from
> > the subject line when
> > the message wanders back on toppic as they often do.
> > :-)
> >
> > Sarah Van Oosterwijck
> > Assistive Technology Instructor
> > http://home.earthlink.net/~netentity
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.5.1 - Release Date: 6/2/2005
>
Other related posts:
