les about your suggestion that people read all the way through their messages
then answer, well
i agree with that, the only problem is i suspect some people are just in love
with seeing their
answer up their.
the reason i say this, is i use a differant rule than you, at least with
commonly asked questions.
in stead of reading all questions first, i look at the time, if the question is
new i answer it figureing
that people want an answer a s a p.
with that said common sense should tell people answering the question a week
later that this
person already has a correct answer.
still many do exactly this.
so hence that is why i proposed such a rule.
spelling things out in black and white helps not only list members, but also
helps the list monitor,
so the monitor can figure out if the person is in a grey area or if the person
has violated multiple
rules.
in addition the thread on the key was exactly what i was refering to when i
said to combine
messages into one.
I was not suggesting combineing messages into one on differant threads.
nor was i saying that a person could not respond to a thread more than once.
i am only saying that before replying a second time to a thread the person
should only do so if in
responds to new information.
when you see 8 messages from the same person on the same thread in a row with
nobody elses
messages in between then you are not using common courtesy, or you are unaware
how to
prevent this.
that thread of 200 messages would have been 20 messages if one person
had combined his answers into a single message..
Of course les if he used your method that task would have been simple.
I can handle a repeteing on topic thread, if the people are considerate and
use common sense.
by the way i think your idea should be put into the guide lines, so that new
users will understand
that this method is a way to reduce traffic.
what is obvious to us is not always so obvious to raw beginners.
also while the thread about keys is one that resurfaces from time to time,
their was info to be
learned even in that thread.
like the fact hj is now switched keys again, to a non speech friendly install.
So I am not one to try to limit something if it falls into guidelines just
because it is old to me, but
do think rules that are fair to all could help in many areas.
bill cameron
p s my rule about people asking only one question i suspect might have people
that use this list
to learn somethig the super easy way, do the following 2 things.
1. not delete trash mail box when exiting the e mail program
so the user can go back and search their mail box for an answer.
2. save messages for possible future refferance.
some people say why bother to do this, when i need it i shall just ask.
that hurts the people on this list that try to limit questions to the list.
last week i asked a simple question to this list, got a very complex answer.
i laughed when i read it, the person said glad to help you for a change.
he assumed that because i do not post a lot of questions that i was very
knowledgeable,
and so he thought my question was harder than it really was.
I do not spend all my time on this list just to help others, i spend a lot of
time to get knowledge, and often find my answers by the 2 methods above,
so i do not usually need to post them.
believe me when i say i have plenty of questions to.
At 06:53 AM 4/2/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi Bill,
>
>One thing that should reduce redundant responses, (15 right answers to the
>same question) is that all should read through their mail packets first
>prior to responding to a message. I'm guilty of not doing this. Someone
>submits a question, I will respond to it from the message, and then find
>out that others have already done so. One way this could work in Eudora is
>to read the message. If you think you might wish to respond, but read the
>rest of the mail packet first, hit alt-right arrow to move to the next
>message, leaving the message you may wish to respond to in tact. Then, if
>you wish to respond, the message will be at the bottom of the list when
>your mail packet is completed. I agree that Nick has to take a heavy hand
>with so many on the list. Besides, I don't think we would have had the
>flood of messages we had a couple of weeks ago on the Jaws authorization
>issue for probably the 10th time if Nick had been moderating; he wouldn't
>have tolerated that. Like it or not, moderation is required to avoid
>excess traffic. It's a tough call sometimes, but I think Nick has been
>fair overall in doing his job.
>Best Regards,
>
>Les
>-
>Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
-
Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
