Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Damon Harper <nomad74@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Topic headers [OT/Rant central]
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 04:34:05 PST
>So please, change the topic after your first re requote, unless its a
>dead on reply to the first post. I'm sure we all know how...

Here, here. And if I may expand on his Mongoose's suggestion: Read
ALL the posts in your mailbox(or at least along that thread) before
posting. I get so sick of reading the same blindingly obvious answer to
some newbie(no offense) question. Expanding on ideas(case in point) is
okay. But posting a reply to something Adam wrote, the posting a reply
to a reply that adam wrote, the posting to a... well, you get the idea.
This is also another small, yet easy detail that would cut down bandwith
and keep interest high.

>
>Mongoose
>
>PS- whats that damn "&amp" thing that pops up in some people's topic
>headers? It gets in there and never leaves, like sand in your
>underware!

LOL... the last thing we need... MORE stuff in Mongoose's underwear,
I'm sure. :)


-Vagabond <nomad74@*******.com><ICQ 4297972>
___________________________________________________________
¹vag·a·bond \va-ge-bänd\ adj. 1: wandering, homeless
2: of, characteristic of, or leading the life of a vagrant
or tramp 3: leading an unsettled or irresponsible life

²vagabond n: one leading a vagabond life; esp : tramp


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 2
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Topic headers [OT/Rant central]
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 08:25:18 EST
In a message dated 98-02-13 07:34:50 EST, nomad74@*******.COM writes:

> Here, here. And if I may expand on his Mongoose's suggestion: Read
> ALL the posts in your mailbox(or at least along that thread) before
> posting. I get so sick of reading the same blindingly obvious answer to
> some newbie(no offense) question. Expanding on ideas(case in point) is
> okay. But posting a reply to something Adam wrote, the posting a reply
> to a reply that adam wrote, the posting to a... well, you get the idea.
> This is also another small, yet easy detail that would cut down bandwith
> and keep interest high.

Sadly there Damon/Vagabond, this is not possible with all mailers that exist.
The topic came up here before. Sure, I guess you could read everything, and
reply to one post only with all posts it is related to involved. However,
many people do not do this.

What's the matter, more reading for ya? We all skim these things to some
extent for catchy stuff anyway... ;)

-K (who does kind of agree with the need for accurate Topic Headers though)
Message no. 3
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Topic headers [OT/Rant central]
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 13:54:53 +0000
And verily, did Damon Harper hastily scribble thusly...
|
|>So please, change the topic after your first re requote, unless its a
|>dead on reply to the first post. I'm sure we all know how...
|
| Here, here. And if I may expand on his Mongoose's suggestion: Read
|ALL the posts in your mailbox(or at least along that thread) before
|posting.

We've been through all this before and my answer is still no.
I don't have the time or inclination to remember what I want to say where 2
hours after I started. (Maybe a little exageration, but not much).

I answer a thread as I see it. Also, I jump through the contents of my
e-mail by hitting the "up" cursor key, which causes instant jumping to the
next message. I don't jump in and out of the e-mails just to look at the
menu screen.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 4
From: Damon Harper <nomad74@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Topic headers [OT/Rant central]
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 12:41:00 PST
>
>Sadly there Damon/Vagabond, this is not possible with all mailers that
exist.
>The topic came up here before. Sure, I guess you could read
everything, and
>reply to one post only with all posts it is related to involved.
However,
>many people do not do this.
>
>What's the matter, more reading for ya? We all skim these things to
some
>extent for catchy stuff anyway... ;)

Apparantly I'm not making myself clear. Let me give you an example.
Let's say Bubba the newbie posts the question "Is Shadowrun a
roleplaying game?"
Now, instead of going through other replies/ the rest of his mail-
almost being a give in that someone has answered, some just types "yes"
in reply.
So we have 20 messages that say:

Bubba the newbie wrote:
>Is Shadowrun a roleplaying game?
Yes.
-Drekface

Then, Drekface replies to the next letter, which already answered
the one he replied to.

Pudsucker wrote:
>>Bubba the newbie wrote:
>>Is Shadowrun a roleplaying game?
> No, of course it's not you idiot.
>-Pudsucker

Yes it is.
-Drekface.

Now, isn't that annoying? Not only did Drekface read through a
thread that was probably answered, but he only repeated himself. I can
accept that 90% of the time this is going to happen- I've done it
myself. But not with threads/questions that it's obvious have already
been answered. I don't mind reading- I just hate reading the same
thing over and over.

-Vagabond(who thought the need for detailed illustrations was beyond
some people in this group)

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 5
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Topic headers [OT/Rant central]
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 21:59:01 +0100
Damon Harper said on 4:34/13 Feb 98...

> Here, here. And if I may expand on his Mongoose's suggestion: Read
> ALL the posts in your mailbox(or at least along that thread) before
> posting. I get so sick of reading the same blindingly obvious answer to
> some newbie(no offense) question.

Reading and answering mail that may work for some people. but it doesn't
for me. When I see something I want to reply to, I have to do it _now_
because else I've forgotten 90% of the messages I wanted to respond to.
Depending on your POV that may be a good thing, I admit that :)

Note that I quite often delete a reply I've made to a post when I see a
lot of others have already answered it as well.

Then, of course, there are people who simply don't have the time to read
all their mail, and then go back and read it again to see which messages
they want to reply to.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
That's just fine.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 6
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Topic headers [OT/Rant central]
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 16:17:53 -0500
Gurth once dared to write,

>Reading and answering mail that may work for some people. but it doesn't
>for me. When I see something I want to reply to, I have to do it _now_
>because else I've forgotten 90% of the messages I wanted to respond to.
>Depending on your POV that may be a good thing, I admit that :)

My simple technique is to open up all the letters in a thread and
delete them as I go. If something strikes me as needing a response I save
that letter to get back to it after I've read the rest of the thread.
Then I decide if I'm going to respond. Of course some I save until I have
time to respond and on a few times a question in general was answered in
another thread.

>Then, of course, there are people who simply don't have the time to read
>all their mail, and then go back and read it again to see which messages
>they want to reply to.

Well, I'm having to mass delete threads right now to time
constraints but I do get back to the threads I've responded in. And there
are time when I never get back to responding to some posts.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 7
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Topic headers [OT/Rant central]
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 14:41:10 -0700
Gurth wrote:
/
/ Note that I quite often delete a reply I've made to a post when I see a
/ lot of others have already answered it as well.

It's a good idea to use that option if you're using Pegasus or Eudora
(or something similar) and you've set it to send mail when you
reconnect.

Then there are people like me and Spike who use ELM. Once you send
something with ELM, it's gone and out the door as soon as you hit the
send key. As I'm reading posts I save anything I think I might
respond to. Then I go back to those saved posts and reply to them.
Occasionally I immediately reply to a post, when I've thought of
something complex and I know I won't remember after I've plowed
through my mailbox.

-David
--
"By the way, this may look like a slab of liver
but it's an external brain pack."
- Ratbert
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 8
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Topic headers [OT/Rant central]
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 1998 00:49:07 +0000
And verily, did MC23 hastily scribble thusly...
| My simple technique is to open up all the letters in a thread and
|delete them as I go. If something strikes me as needing a response I save
|that letter to get back to it after I've read the rest of the thread.
|Then I decide if I'm going to respond. Of course some I save until I have
|time to respond and on a few times a question in general was answered in
|another thread.

That wouldn't work for me either.
Look...
[bilbo][0:47:50] Spike% quota -v
Disk quotas for u5a77 (uid 22927):
Filesystem usage quota limit timeleft files quota limit
timeleft
/home/frodo 4570 5000 6000 0 0 0
/home/sam/pcguest
0 1 1 0 0 0
/home/sam/students
0 1 1 0 0 0

If I did that, I'd be wayyyyy over quota in no time.
It's bad enough at the moment...

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 9
From: Dvixen <dvixen@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Topic headers [OT/Rant central]
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 1998 02:51:36 -0800
*sigh*

As soemone has pointed out, this subject has been beaten to death multiple
times already.

Some mailers are not easily capable of what everyone says is 'proper
netiquette'.

Regardless. If you are able to save posts and read them all and not make
redundant replies, PLEASE DO! If not - remember that you are redundant, and
with that in mind, we'll get along famously. (maybe)

Now, say good bye to this topic, it goes nowhere fast, and in circles, even.
Buh-bye!

-Dvixen
FAQ Flunky of the SRCard and Shadowrn mailing lists
htpp://coastnet.com/~dvixen/shadowrn/srnfaq1.html
Message no. 10
From: Mon goose <landsquid@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Topic headers [OT/Rant central]
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 1998 11:25:03 PST
>*sigh*
>
>As soemone has pointed out, this subject has been beaten to death
multiple
>times already.
>
>Some mailers are not easily capable of what everyone says is 'proper
>netiquette'.
>
>Regardless. If you are able to save posts and read them all and not
make
>redundant replies, PLEASE DO! If not - remember that you are redundant,
and
>with that in mind, we'll get along famously. (maybe)
>
>Now, say good bye to this topic, it goes nowhere fast, and in circles,
even.
>Buh-bye!
>
>-Dvixen
>FAQ Flunky of the SRCard and Shadowrn mailing lists
>htpp://coastnet.com/~dvixen/shadowrn/srnfaq1.html
>

And here we have an example of why I started this thread- Notice the
topic header never mentions redundant replies, and Dvixens reply never
mentions using subject related Topic Headers. Gah, might as well post
something about the Otaku called "Blood Magic".

EVERY mailer has the capability to easily change the topic header. I
don't see why few people do it- new topics get more attention than a 5th
genereation reply that may have drifted halfway around the world. As a
bonus, you can easily see when people are responding to your post if you
give it a more specific topic.

Mongoose / Technological progress is like an ax in the hands
of a psychotic - Einstein

get sucked into -The Vortex- Chicago's shadowland BBS
http://www.concentric.net/~evamarie/srmain.htm


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Topic headers [OT/Rant central], you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.