e-mail procedure

[Wolfgang Wuster]

On Thu, 12 Oct 1995, Robert Zuparko wrote:

> Gee, I guess I'm a killjoy like Julian Humphries, but I too would rather
> that people respond directly to the person who initiates a question,
> instead on netting answers out to everybody. When I log-on, it is a major
> pain for me to have to go through 20, 30, 40 or 50 messages EACH DAY
> (even if it is only to automatically delete them based on the subject
> entry). If a subject arises that requires a lot of back-and-forth
> discussion, then of course it should go out system-wide, but please take
> a minute to think about how your message should best be directed before
> flooding everyone's incoming mailboxes. After all, if you are interested
> in the responses to someone inquiry, you can always contact that person
> directly.

I disagree totally. OK, some of the stuff here is not of the highest
scientific merit, but many readers, including myself, enjoy reading about
the quirkier aspects of science (e.g., the keys/bad examples threads).
Furthermore, a lot of people probably do learn things through reading
some of the discussion that goes on here.

Is hitting "D" a few more time really such hard work? If it is, why not
get the digest of Taxacom, and only read those messages that you are
interested in?

--
Wolfgang Wuster
School of Biological Sciences, University of Wales, Bangor, UK
e-mail: bss166 at bangor.ac.uk

Thought for the day: If you see a light at the end of the tunnel,
it is probably a train coming your way.