Clipping Replies and HTML Coded Messages
It's possible for the moderator to set the list so that it removes all
attachments, including HTML coding, from incoming messages. I can't
understand why that isn't Yahoo's default. :o( The file and photo sections
are where pictures should be posted, there's no reason in the world for
allowing attachments in the messages.
attachments, including HTML coding, from incoming messages. I can't
understand why that isn't Yahoo's default. :o( The file and photo sections
are where pictures should be posted, there's no reason in the world for
allowing attachments in the messages.
On Fri, 10 May 2002 22:58:22 -0500, somebody wrote:
> PLEASE "CLIP" THE REPLIES
>
> This message [shown at bottom] is followed by over 300 lines of repeated
> text
>
> Much of it is from:
>
> "--- Richard Spelling <richard@...> wrote:"
>
> who is posting in HTML, or another similar format, which propogates
> profusely in most E-mail "engines"
>
> Please post in "plain text" and clip replies.
>
> It's annoying to scroll through hundreds of lines of repeated nonsense, and
> may be a "real" problem for those with slower connections, or limited
> storage.
> ...
--
John <jkohnen@...>
http://www.boat-links.com/
Missionaries, my Dear! Don't you realize that missionaries are the divinely
provided food for destitute cannibals? Whenever they are on the brink of
starvation, Heaven in its infinite mercy send them a nice plump missionary.
<Oscar Wilde>
I get a daily digest of the postings and clipping makes them a whole
lot more readable. There are times that there is so much unclipped
that I get fed up and just delete the entire digest. A 50K email
that is straight text is very long...especially when it is unsnipped
when we get 2 or 3 digests per day.
Please snip...it makes the whole mess readable and much easier to
follow.
I generally try to snip all but the directly pertinant quotes to
which I may be responding.
lot more readable. There are times that there is so much unclipped
that I get fed up and just delete the entire digest. A 50K email
that is straight text is very long...especially when it is unsnipped
when we get 2 or 3 digests per day.
Please snip...it makes the whole mess readable and much easier to
follow.
I generally try to snip all but the directly pertinant quotes to
which I may be responding.
I don't take it personaly. I do, however, clip replies and at other
times I don't. To take one example from a few posts back, someone
inadvertently connected my name to comments I imagine are copyright
protected. What is more they made engineering like responses, and I
am not an engineer, so re-connecting these comments to those of an
engineer makes them stronger, clipping the quotes would make a
nonsense of my response. (To make maters worse, my connection didn't
work and I posted 3 copies.)
I should point out this problem occured BECAUSE someone clipped
replies. I am not saying they shouldn't have, but it can lead to
problems of itself. I am not here to edit the newsgroup, and I am
not going to waste my time making excruciatingly delicate little
edits when just leaving more of the text might be safer.
Another thing that happens is the whole thing about what subject
headings refer to. This original discusion had drifted off to the
merits of specific glues, when the original heading was about VB and
TII. I know from sad experience that if you clip out hot discusions,
and post each minute fragment under a new heading, often no one
responds. So if you are going to waste your time making detailled
responses to questions that may even require significant research, do
you post it under a seperate heading that may not be read? I know I
let my sense of the market guide me. But what happens when there are
six discussions masked under a single heading? Nobody can follow
them if you clip all the references out. There are a number of
reasons for disliking mixed threads, but if you want any new content
consider what is required to keep it moving.
- In bolger@y..., "Yosemit3" <yosemit3@e...> wrote:
times I don't. To take one example from a few posts back, someone
inadvertently connected my name to comments I imagine are copyright
protected. What is more they made engineering like responses, and I
am not an engineer, so re-connecting these comments to those of an
engineer makes them stronger, clipping the quotes would make a
nonsense of my response. (To make maters worse, my connection didn't
work and I posted 3 copies.)
I should point out this problem occured BECAUSE someone clipped
replies. I am not saying they shouldn't have, but it can lead to
problems of itself. I am not here to edit the newsgroup, and I am
not going to waste my time making excruciatingly delicate little
edits when just leaving more of the text might be safer.
Another thing that happens is the whole thing about what subject
headings refer to. This original discusion had drifted off to the
merits of specific glues, when the original heading was about VB and
TII. I know from sad experience that if you clip out hot discusions,
and post each minute fragment under a new heading, often no one
responds. So if you are going to waste your time making detailled
responses to questions that may even require significant research, do
you post it under a seperate heading that may not be read? I know I
let my sense of the market guide me. But what happens when there are
six discussions masked under a single heading? Nobody can follow
them if you clip all the references out. There are a number of
reasons for disliking mixed threads, but if you want any new content
consider what is required to keep it moving.
- In bolger@y..., "Yosemit3" <yosemit3@e...> wrote:
> PLEASE "CLIP" THE REPLIES
>
> This message [to offend, or inconvenience anyone!]
PLEASE "CLIP" THE REPLIES
This message [shown at bottom] is followed by over 300 lines of repeated
text
Much of it is from:
"--- Richard Spelling <richard@...> wrote:"
who is posting in HTML, or another similar format, which propogates
profusely in most E-mail "engines"
Please post in "plain text" and clip replies.
It's annoying to scroll through hundreds of lines of repeated nonsense, and
may be a "real" problem for those with slower connections, or limited
storage.
_______________________________________________________
[Message: 13
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 13:44:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: thomas dalzell <proaconstrictor@...>
Subject: Re: vacuum bagging and TiteBond II
I don't have a URL. Do you have one for T II data?
It is based on my experience ....]
_________________________________________________________
[note: I'm not trying to "flame" ANYONE. None of this is personal! The
referred to "offenders" are "inadvertant" offenders, and in no way are
doing anything intentional to offend, or inconvenience anyone!]
This message [shown at bottom] is followed by over 300 lines of repeated
text
Much of it is from:
"--- Richard Spelling <richard@...> wrote:"
who is posting in HTML, or another similar format, which propogates
profusely in most E-mail "engines"
Please post in "plain text" and clip replies.
It's annoying to scroll through hundreds of lines of repeated nonsense, and
may be a "real" problem for those with slower connections, or limited
storage.
_______________________________________________________
[Message: 13
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 13:44:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: thomas dalzell <proaconstrictor@...>
Subject: Re: vacuum bagging and TiteBond II
I don't have a URL. Do you have one for T II data?
It is based on my experience ....]
_________________________________________________________
[note: I'm not trying to "flame" ANYONE. None of this is personal! The
referred to "offenders" are "inadvertant" offenders, and in no way are
doing anything intentional to offend, or inconvenience anyone!]