Re: Q:Re: Top vs bottom posting. WAS - OT - This just in...
From: Judity01 (judity01_at_aol.com)
Date: 09/12/04
- Next message: Judity01: "Re: Sunday jokes"
- Previous message: Su: "Sunday jokes"
- In reply to: CindyB: "Re: Q:Re: Top vs bottom posting. WAS - OT - This just in..."
- Next in thread: Phyllis: "Re: Q:Re: Top vs bottom posting. WAS - OT - This just in..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 12 Sep 2004 14:02:52 GMT
(( I also prefer it when the post being replied to shows to whom
it is attributed. ))
I sometimes forget, Cindy, but I do try to address my response to that person.
So often I see the original posting person's name followed by a second person's
name who responded to the first one. A third post has both names on top of the
both copied posts, and often the words are quickly read and attributed to the
wrong person. That's when some misunderstandings happen, and then apologizes
have to be made.
However, it is nice that we can have this discussion about such a minor thing
on a quiet September weekend, isn't it? I'm sitting here watching "Sunday
Morning" on CBS with Charles Osgood, the show that I make a point of watching
to start off my week in a gentle peaceful way. I've been doing this for years,
and they have only failed me a few Sundays when the world insisted on intruding
with its hateful actions.
This week they are talking about paintings and shoes. If they can consider
these subjects important, why shouldn't we have a nice conversation of where to
put copied words? Happy Sunday, everyone.
Judity
- Next message: Judity01: "Re: Sunday jokes"
- Previous message: Su: "Sunday jokes"
- In reply to: CindyB: "Re: Q:Re: Top vs bottom posting. WAS - OT - This just in..."
- Next in thread: Phyllis: "Re: Q:Re: Top vs bottom posting. WAS - OT - This just in..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|