Re[2]: Alternative to long Mails

Subject: Re[2]: Alternative to long Mails
From: "Arlen P. Walker" <Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- JCI -dot- COM>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 11:50:00 -0600

Arlen, you don't HAVE to read newsgroups online.

You're right, Win. I was thinking only of AOL, because most of the frustration
is coming from there. As you might expect, since AOL makes its money from
connect time charges, it doesn't have a DL facility (except for individual

But since most of the time savings would come from interactively choosing which
subject threads to read, anyway, I'm not sure how much time you'd save DL-ing
all new messages as opposed to DL-ing the digest as a single E-Mail. Unless you
could make one pass to DL the headers, then make a second pass later, DL-ing
only selected bodies and marking the uninteresting ones as read.

I don't know. I'm just looking for an alternative to the "Hard Cheese, Loser"
answers that have been popular of late.

Have fun,
Chief Managing Director In Charge, Department of Redundancy Department
DNRC 124

Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- JCI -dot- Com
In God we trust; all others must provide data.

Previous by Author: Re: HoTMetaL oops
Next by Author: Re: HTML ethics
Previous by Thread: Re: Alternative to long Mails
Next by Thread: Re[3]: Alternative to long Mails

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

Sponsored Ads