IMHO, I'd request that if we want to flood the email server with further
pleading to Bill to return to the old system, please do so off list. It is
finals/term paper time. Many of us would rather not go through all these
emails again. (Can you say "displacement behavior"?) :) Again, just a
frien
At 02:57 AM 5/18/99 -0500, G. Marc Turner wrote in part:
>I stand corrected...I made a mistake...I was just flat out wrong...
>
>
>HOWEVER, the messages appear to be longer than ever before. The average
>message size has gradually increased over the years. This measure was
>calculated by taking th
I stand corrected...I made a mistake...I was just flat out wrong...
Having not been able to get to sleep tonight, I did a little poking around
and the number of posts over the first 4 months of this year is the lowest
4 month period since Fall 1993, with Summer of 1994 being only slightly
above.
One positive feature of the current system would seem to be that when people
have forgotten to turn off their "receipt confirmation request" it does not
result in days of those messages bouncing around the list. I personally feel
that being courteous enough to delete the original poster's address
Here are my two cents:
1) The intent of the change was to decrease the flow of messages to the
list. Although I haven't been keeping up to date with the TIPS stats (maybe
I'll do that now that I've turned in final grades), my guess is that it has
NOT had the desired effect.
2) As was warned when
I agree with Bob. I do the samething he does and haven't had any
problems with the new format.
Personally, if I'm going to err in not checking who I'm sending the
message to, I'd rather err in the direction of sending to one than in
sending to several hundred.
Bob Wildblood wrote:
>
> I find i
I find it quite easy to "reply to all" (as I did with this reply)and then
delete the poster's (Rick's) address so it only goes to the list. Also
when I want to make an off-list response to a poster I simply hit reply.
Works fine for me.
Bob
At 17:47 5/17/99 -0400, Rick Adams wrote:
>Stephen
RE: is there a problem with this list?
Stephen wrote:
> I think it's time to declare the experiment over and go back to the
> old system.
I agree completely. There has certainly been plenty of time for Bill to
evaluate the change. It would be nice to hear the reactions of ot
YES, BILL, I SAY LET'S GO BACK TO THE OLD SYSTEM!
annette
On Mon, 17 May 1999, Stephen Black wrote:
>
> As someone who posts frequently, the result is that I receive many
> more messages under the new system than under the old, and these are
> always unneeded duplicates. I believe the change
Stephen wrote:
> I think it's time to declare the experiment over and go back to the
> old system.
I agree completely. There has certainly been plenty of time for Bill to
evaluate the change. It would be nice to hear the reactions of others to the
situation.
Rick
--
Rick Adams
On Mon, 17 May 1999, ITP_Faculty_Faith_Florer wrote:
>
> I'm receiving two copies of messages from TIPs today. I'm also receiving
> some pretty late. Is there a problem with the list today? Can it be
> cleared up?
>
No, I think what happened is that you posted a message to TIPS, and
people are
11 matches
Mail list logo
