Manners when asking for information
Wm E Davidsen Jr
davidsen at crdos1.crd.ge.COM
Fri Jan 19 01:17:03 AEST 1990
In article <552 at bbxsda.UUCP> scott at bbxsda.UUCP (Scott Amspoker) writes:
| Yep. I could never figure this one out. Somebody posts a request for
| information in a particular newsgroup that he/she doesn't normally read.
| Then they go on to suggest that they will not continue to read that newsgroup
| for the next week or so to see the answers to their question. Go figure.
I have occasionally asked that people mail and I could summarize. I
think I have always done so if I got any answers. This saves a bunch of
postings of "let me know too" and allows deletion of sigs and quoting of
the original article. If done reasonably well it saves bandwidth and
results in a posting which is more useful to the readers. My recent
summary of replies to the questions on the Compuadd ESDI controller was
an example of this, I listed the names of the "tell me, too" replaies,
and nothing else.
Some of us have other logistical problems. Because of disk space
limitations I have had to set expire times to be short and also dynamic
for some groups. This means that is a bunch of large postings come in
over the weekend I may lose postings in some groups (expire has gone as
low as 32 hours in some cases). Mail will sit there and wait until
Monday.
I think that *in some cases* there are good reasons for requesting
mail rather than posting, particularly if the question is posted to a
number of groups which might not like the trqffic of the answers. People
complain less about a single summary, even if the topic is only
marginally related to the main group content.
I agree that lazyness *by itself* is a poor reason to ask for mail.
--
bill davidsen (davidsen at crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
More information about the Comp.unix.xenix
mailing list