Re: THANKS! Re: It's time to go

Subject: Re: THANKS! Re: It's time to go
From: "Jane Carnall" <jane -dot- carnall -at- digitalbridges -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 13:15:52 -0000

I posted this offlist to Michael, cc'd to Eric. Michael has now unsubscribed
(as he told me in his offlist response) and I have Eric's permission to post
this direct to the list.

>>5. It has become obvious to me that despite the list rule about negative
and personal postings, that rule is generally not enforced. I can't think of
anywhere to assign responsibility for that except at the door of the list
manager. <

Michael, I'm taking this offlist since part of the problem - as I see it -
is the sheer number of non-techwhirler posts at the moment.

I think you haven't been on this list for long enough to be able to judge
what it's "really" like. I have noticed a recent tide of posts that
basically I just didn't read because (by previous experience) I was fairly
sure they would be of little value. If Andrew Plato starts a thread that
asks "Are you a writer?" I deal with it by muttering "Yes" (love your
description of him as Ozymandias, btw!) and deleting that post and all
follow-ups unread.

As the thread exploded, I have occasionally looked at some of the posts...
but I don't think I missed anything. But here's precisely where Eric's
difficulty lies: I find Andrew Plato so annoying and so unhelpful that for
quite a while now I've simply been deleting nearly all his posts unread -
(and when I do happen to read them, I usually regret it). This has given me
a stronger sense of harmony and balance (lights crystal, gazes at incense,
etc) and has made the list (for me) a much more pleasant place. Yet I know
that many posters enjoy Andrew's posts and find his advice both amusing and
practical: they say so onlist. Why should Eric tick off Andrew for posting
something that really annoyed me - when several other people probably
enjoyed it very much? No reason: so I save myself the annoyance in advance,
and use the delete button.

There are a LOT of posts to this list. If I read all of them, I'd hardly get
any work done. I imagine that Eric is in something of the same situation -
with the added factor that what looks like an amusingly ironic post to one
person, may seem harsh and insulting to another. The longer you've known
someone, often, the better you are able to guess their intentions - and Eric
has known some of the people who post to this list regularly for many years.
Even if he had time to read every post thoroughly (which I doubt he does) he
certainly doesn't have time to do it before three responses (at least) will
be sizzling in everyone's inbox.

I don't see what Eric can do about the recent increase in onlist bad manners
beyond what he already does. I agree with what someone else said: we all
have to think a bit more about what we post. I don't *think* I've been
guilty of onlist rudeness, but I admit that some of my offlist posts have
probably gone over the line - and I intend to try to do better about this.

Running this list is hard work: I am very appreciative of the fact that Eric
and Deborah do it for free. But for it to be a useful resource depends on
our collective will, not Eric. If there are three people who peculiarly
annoy you, *don't respond* - or use delete. Post what you would like to
read. Read the posts that interest you. Ignore the rest.

Thanks for reading this far, and apologies if I appear to be preaching.

Jane Carnall
Apologies for the long additional sig: it is added automatically and outwith
my control.
Home: hj -dot- carnall -at- virgin -dot- net


________________________________________________________________________

E-mail is an informal method of communication and may be subject to data corruption, interception and unauthorised amendment for which Digital Bridges Ltd will accept no liability. Therefore, it will normally be inappropriate to rely on information contained on e-mail without obtaining written confirmation.

This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden.

________________________________________________________________________


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Check it out! Get some cool freebies when you buy RoboHelp! You'll receive
SnagIt screen capture software and a 10% discount voucher for RoboHelp
Consulting. This special offers expires March 29, 2002.
www.ehelp.com/techwr

Have you looked at the new content on TECHWR-L lately?
See http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ and check it out.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.


References:
RE: risk assessment: From: Jane Carnall

Previous by Author: RE: risk assessment
Next by Author: RE: THANKS! Re: It's time to go
Previous by Thread: RE: risk assessment
Next by Thread: re: risk assessment (clarification)


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads