Re: [PLUG] This isn't a new thread

["Joseph B. Welsh" <JWelsh@consecodirect.com>]

Jeff Abrahamson wrote:

> (was: [PLUG] User Accounts)
>
> <sermon>
>
>  Do you see the line in the headers that says something like
>
>  References: <20010531080250.C31156@purple.com>
Fine.  I didn't know that.  I wanted to ask a quick question and that's 
how I did it.

>  (Do you know how annoying it is to look, for example, for a social
>  note from last week only to find, in the end, that it has sorted 2000
>  messages further back because it was "a new message" that was created
>  by replying to an old one from a couple months ago and changing the
>  subject.)
>
> </sermon>
You want to know what I find annoying.

It's when some one asks a question on a list and if they don't follow a 
certain etiquette in the asking.  Whether it is a mail written in HTML, 
or a question that's been answered in a list FAQ, or when someone does 
something that I just did.

Ok Fine, They made a mistake.  You went to great lengths to explain to 
me why what I did is bad form.  The annoying part is that while you took 
the time to point out my mistake, You DIDN'T answer my question. You 
made no comment whatsover about it.  

Was the question not valid becuase I didn't start a new thread correctly?
Did you have only enough time to comment on my mistake?

You obviously know more about list etiquette than I do.  

So I ask you this:

Wouldn't this be friendlier...Answer the question first (even if you 
don't know) and then as a By the way...Explain the thread problem.

I not trying to start an argument. I thought the way you gave your 
"sermon" was slightly rude

Joseph B. Welsh




______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group       -      http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  -  http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug