Would you please advise on the method to respond "in the text " of an
e-mail answering or asking for info.
You explicitly instruct NOT to answer the e-m to "the List".
thank you.
suuri suomi



--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

catalina wrote:
> Would you please advise on the method to respond "in the text " of an
> e-mail answering or asking for info.
> You explicitly instruct NOT to answer the e-m to "the List".

Hello,

I'm not sure I understand the question...? You answer like...well, like
this. Often accepted and least-flamed is for you to reply either at the
bottom of the post you're replying to or use an "inline" reply, where
you place relevant text starting on a line under a particular point
inside the quoted text you're replying to, so it reads like a conversation.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

catalina wrote:
> Would you please advise on the method to respond "in the text " of an
> e-mail answering or asking for info.

If I read this correctly, it means like this.

> You explicitly instruct NOT to answer the e-m to "the List".
> thank you.
> suuri suomi


Basically if in the post there is multiple questions asked, you should
snip out the irrelevant parts (for conserving bandwidth) and answer each
part in turn underneath the appropriate question.

It helps keep things clear when answering a long post.

However, if this isn't at all what you want to know, can you clarify?




--
Libenter homines id quod volunt credunt -- Caius Julius Caesar


Mark Haney
Sr. Systems Administrator
ERC Broadband
(828) 350-2415

Call (866) ERC-7110 for after hours support

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

Thank you !

On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 08:38 -0400, Mark Haney wrote:
> catalina wrote:
> > Would you please advise on the method to respond "in the text " of an
> > e-mail answering or asking for info.
>
> If I read this correctly, it means like this.
>
> > You explicitly instruct NOT to answer the e-m to "the List".
> > thank you.
> > suuri suomi
>
>
> Basically if in the post there is multiple questions asked, you should
> snip out the irrelevant parts (for conserving bandwidth) and answer each
> part in turn underneath the appropriate question.
>
> It helps keep things clear when answering a long post.
>
> However, if this isn't at all what you want to know, can you clarify?
>
>
>
>
> --
> Libenter homines id quod volunt credunt -- Caius Julius Caesar
>
>
> Mark Haney
> Sr. Systems Administrator
> ERC Broadband
> (828) 350-2415
>
> Call (866) ERC-7110 for after hours support
>


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

catalina wrote:
> Thank you !
>
> On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 08:38 -0400, Mark Haney wrote:
>> catalina wrote:
>>> Would you please advise on the method to respond "in the text " of an
>>> e-mail answering or asking for info.
>> If I read this correctly, it means like this.
>>
>>> You explicitly instruct NOT to answer the e-m to "the List".
>>> thank you.
>>> suuri suomi
>>
>> Basically if in the post there is multiple questions asked, you should
>> snip out the irrelevant parts (for conserving bandwidth) and answer each
>> part in turn underneath the appropriate question.
>>
>> It helps keep things clear when answering a long post.
>>
>> However, if this isn't at all what you want to know, can you clarify?
>>
Wow, I can't stop laughing.

Suuri, it's also advisable not to top post.

Dave

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 14:56 -0400, David Curtis wrote:
> Suuri, it's also advisable not to top post.

Well, if it's a one-line "thank you" or similar stuff, I don't see why.
In this case, reading a top post is certainly better than wading through
quotes after quotes just to read one line at the end.


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Thursday 07 August 2008 13:42:02 Mario Vukelic wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 14:56 -0400, David Curtis wrote:
> > Suuri, it's also advisable not to top post.
>
> Well, if it's a one-line "thank you" or similar stuff, I don't
> see why. In this case, reading a top post is certainly better
> than wading through quotes after quotes just to read one line
> at the end.

A word to the wise. It is bad practice to argue about the mailing
list rules and practice. Just do as everyone else does and
concentrate on the real reason you are here.


--
Regards,
Brian

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

Mario Vukelic wrote:

> On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 14:56 -0400, David Curtis wrote:
>> Suuri, it's also advisable not to top post.
>
> Well, if it's a one-line "thank you" or similar stuff, I don't see why.
> In this case, reading a top post is certainly better than wading through
> quotes after quotes just to read one line at the end.

No, it's not. The whole purpose of "don't top post" is to get people to
trim. If you write one line and include 1000 lines of other people's
posts, it's a bad thing whether you top-posted or not. There are still
millions of people out there who are paying by the byte or on slow dial-up
connections who really need us to trim.
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Thursday 07 August 2008 05:27:56 am Derek Broughton wrote:
> Mario Vukelic wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 14:56 -0400, David Curtis wrote:
> >> Suuri, it's also advisable not to top post.
> >
> > Well, if it's a one-line "thank you" or similar stuff, I don't see why.
> > In this case, reading a top post is certainly better than wading through
> > quotes after quotes just to read one line at the end.
>
> No, it's not. The whole purpose of "don't top post" is to get people to
> trim. If you write one line and include 1000 lines of other people's
> posts, it's a bad thing whether you top-posted or not. There are still
> millions of people out there who are paying by the byte or on slow dial-up
> connections who really need us to trim.

Good reason! The thing that really bothers me however is how badly it mangles
the conversation. It gets to the point where it can not be followed no
matter how good the information contained.

I always wonder if those who post things like, " In this case, reading a top
post is certainly better than wading through quotes after quotes just to read
one line at the end." actually understand what they just wrote. Why in the
world would one include "quote after quote" if it was of no value to the
answer? And it it were pertainent, why do they believe the answer comes
before the question?!! What is it? ...Thank you for what you're about to
say?



--
73 de N7PSV aka Pastor JW <n>< * PDGA# 35276
http://the-inner-circle.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_original_inner_circle
http://h.webring.com/hub?ring=universalministr

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users