Public SourceMage Discussion List

["Glenn Shannon" <warlock AT cyberlok.org>]

My usual etiquette on mailing lists is to hit reply all, then check who
I am sending to in order to make sure I am not including unneeded
addresses (someone who I know gets the list, etc).

As far as contextual replying I usually try to reply in context so
people can see what it is I am responding to, but if it doesn't look
good (i.e. too much "hunting" in order to get to the info I wish to
disseminate) I will reply but reference the statements (i.e. "well you
said that x was related to y, but my contention is that y is actually a
substructure of z and therefore is the same as the whole of z making
your relation to y not only incorrect but irrelevant"..)

Good discussion going on, the main reason I replied is that this is one
of the nuances of etiquette online that intrigues me is how we all deal
with mass mailing lists.

Anyhow, still lurking about :)

Glenn
(former disk guru)

-----Original Message-----
From: sm-discuss-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:sm-discuss-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Robin Sheat
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 10:43 PM
To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] List etiquette

On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 09:26:09PM -0800, Eric Sandall wrote:
> There's also the posting after the context, rather than having it all
at the
> bottem (which may be considered the same thing, by some).
That is what I meant, only you expressed it less ambiguously :)

> I prefere that method, though sometimes it's hard to read if the
thread gets
> overly long.
Yes :)

-- 
Robin <robin AT kallisti.net.nz>                 JabberID:
<eythian AT jabber.org>

Hostes alienigeni me abduxerunt. Qui annus est?

PGP Key 0x776DB663 Fingerprint=DD10 5C62 1E29 A385 9866 0853 CD38 E07A
776D B663