Hi. Sorry that my first introduction to the list is on list etiquette, but wanted to thank you for bringing this up. I have joined the list in the last couple of weeks and enjoy following the discussions, but in the last week my inbox has been flooded. Simply putting the futurework email address in the 'to' (as opposed to cc) field would solve the problem.
Tanya Campbell > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Karen Watters Cole > Sent: 14 December 2002 17:00 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: List etiquette - Increasing Value Added Attributes to the > Product > > Malcolm wrote 12.04.02: I've noticed an increasing tendency (basically my > inbox is filling up as the filtering is being messed up) for futureworkers > to post to people on the list in threaded discussion, and cc to > futurework. > It is also totally messing up the threading making the lines of argument > rather hard to follow! > > This totally messes up filtering of mail into, for example, the futurework > inbox. Can we make it a sort of "rule" that postings that are following > discussions are posted to /futurework/ in the "to" field, and cc'd to the > people you are having discussions with? That way filtering and threading > will remain consistent." > > I appreciate Malcolm's drawing attention to the FW traffic jam. > Given all the interesting exchange so far this month, it has been harder > to > sort through the duplicate posts, especially since a few of us have > 'fallen > off the wagon' and started abusing the TO line and Cc lines. Email and > chat > groups are not for wimps, but a little maintenance goes a long way. > Another email courtesy would be to condense the 'previous post said' > segment. These may seem like minor annoyances but it would reduce the > amount of time Readers use to determine if they have already read a post, > allowing more time to read new incoming and maybe, just maybe, add more > Posters than Lurkers. > If there is just a 33% positive response to this post, it may suggest that > markets are capable of being self-regulated. Maybe. > Regards, > Karen > East of Portland, West of Mt Hood > Outgoing Mail Scanned by NAV 2002 > >
