paddy wrote:
> Chad Perrin wrote:
>
>> steve szmidt wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday 29 November 2004 01:50 pm, Chad Perrin wrote:
>>>
>>>> xcalibre wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Folks can we once again please change the topic of disscussion.
>>>>> The main Subject thread name needs to be buried.!
>>>>>
>>>>> BP.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> These warnings don't do any good if YOU don't change the subject line
>>>> EITHER.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Chad
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course the subject line is not the problem. It just appears to be
>>> for those who's software does not support threading by header vs
>>> using subject as a thread.
>>> If you reply to a thread, and change the subject you are still
>>> continuing the thread. Start a new message - not reply.
>>>
>>> Then make sure this thread is not used again, pleaase!
>>
>>
>>
>> . . . except that some people were complaining because the previous
>> subject line was bitingly directed at a particular person. There's
>> been some carrying on in the list about how "demeaning" the subject
>> line was. While I personally wouldn't be bothered too much by that if
>> it were me that it was directed at, I certainly understand how others
>> might be, and as such I try to respect their wishes when they find a
>> subject line offensive.
>>
>> The difficulty with starting new threads is that sometimes a
>> conversation evolves gradually, and one finds oneself in a discussion
>> completely different by its end than it was at its beginning. As
>> such, whether or not it makes sense to start a fresh thread might be a
>> matter of opinion more than of any objective standard of measure.
>>
>> Just replying to an ongoing thread, ignoring all context, and trying
>> to start a whole new discussion is quite rude, however. In such
>> cases, I agree that a new thread should (always) be started instead.
>> In this instance, since the point being made was (I believe) that
>> someone found the subject line within the thread to be offensive, I
>> think it makes sense to have continued the discussion within the thread.
>>
>> --
>> Chad
>>
> I respect your opinion but the answer sounds like the guys at Enron
> justifying how they operated the company. I just wonder if the guy who
> started the origional subject line would be willing to say in person the
> same thing to the guy who was named in the subject.
>
> Paddy
So, what: you take exception to me continuing a thread but changing the
title of it? Why? How is that anything like Enron? Try making some sense.
-- Chad ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:48:49 EDT