Re: [free-software-melb] Free-software-melb Digest, Vol 20, Issue 13
Hi, I would like to respond to Tim about this: *It's hard enough to find CyanogenMod users at a LUG!*
Er, that was Russell. Are you taking revenge upon Tim for earlier misattributing Russell's text to me? :p Oops, yes I'm really sorry about that Russell. I get so confused sometimes with the message digest I receive.
Jean Elchinger <jean.elchinger@gmail.com> writes:
Oops, yes I'm really sorry about that Russell. I get so confused sometimes with the message digest I receive.
The digest, as you have discovered, is not really suited for someone participating; it's best for someone who wants to read but not reply. I would strongly recommend, if you intend to participate, that you *not* get the message digest but instead get messages delivered individually. It makes it much easier for you to respond and be clear about what you're responding to :-) -- \ “Dad always thought laughter was the best medicine, which I | `\ guess is why several of us died of tuberculosis.” —Jack Handey | _o__) | Ben Finney
I would strongly recommend, if you intend to participate, that you *not* get the message digest but instead get messages delivered individually. It makes it much easier for you to respond and be clear about what you're responding to :-)
Yes, I second that (and if it results in too many messages, set a mail filter to put it in a folder, and treat that folder as your "digest"). The most annoying thing for the rest of the participants is that when someone replies to a digest, the subject line suddenly changes to "Free-software-melb Digest, Vol 20, Issue 13" and we lose track of the conversation topics.
Matt Giuca <matt.giuca@gmail.com> writes:
The most annoying thing for the rest of the participants is that when someone replies to a digest, the subject line suddenly changes to "Free-software-melb Digest, Vol 20, Issue 13" and we lose track of the conversation topics.
Yes. The “Subject” field is set to something useless, *and* the “References” field refers to a message we can't see, which breaks the thread. So that's two significant reasons why replying to a list digest message is a hindrance to the other participants in the conversation. But I was primarily highlighting the benefits to the person replying, and leaving implicit my complaints :-) -- \ “Anyone who puts a small gloss on [a] fundamental technology, | `\ calls it proprietary, and then tries to keep others from | _o__) building on it, is a thief.” —Tim O'Reilly, 2000-01-25 | Ben Finney
participants (3)
-
Ben Finney -
Jean Elchinger -
Matt Giuca