GB> What BA's Use the 2625w Tube?
anchor at EC.RR.COM
Sat Apr 15 10:39:07 EDT 2006
Hi Tom, Ron, et al,
I guess I got this discussion fired up, so I'll jump back in. Yes, I
agree that almost all replies should be shared with the whole list. Ron's
set up 3 lists to operate the "unusual" way, and is probably on at least 3
more that are the "other" way. I know I should be quick enuf to look at
who my reply is going to, but I'm not very good at it. I try to reply to
"all" most of the time, but sometimes see a post from a friend & just rip
off a note to him that has no interest to the group. I'll try to watch
what's going where.
Tom brings up a viewpoint that may be shared by too many - that of
thinking that his response might be boring to the list at large. He now
has changed that opinion, great. The bandwidth issue is, I think, more
suspected than actual, but I agree that much of the bottom stuff can be
removed from a reply. Text messages don't take up much bandwidth, but
lengthy ones can be aggravating to those who suffer with a dialup
connection. Another gripe of mine is those people who get a list in the
digest form and don't delete all the unrelated digest content from their
reply. Again, a grouchy gripe, I have a fast cable connx, but hate
scrolling thru 3-10 posts to see what the guy's talking about,
particularly when he hasn't put the proper subject in.
OK, I'm done. I'll follow this message up with a new one on a
grouch under treatment
----- Original Message -----
From: "TChesek at Epix.Net" <tchesek at EPIX.NET>
To: <BOATANCHORS at LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV>
Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2006 10:05 AM
Subject: Re: [BOATANCHORS-TEMPE] GB> What BA's Use the 2625w Tube?
> I am one of the "guilty" parties who often replies only to the poster or
> the respondent to my post. I always thought that I was saving other's
> by not boring them with my thread while still allowing a venue for me to
> send and receive information pertinent to my specific needs. Having read
> Walt and Ron's posts I now have a totally different view and it makes
> perfect sense. I do feel, however, that it saves bandwidth and time by
> sending a reply and not including the post that you are replying to.
> several back and forths the thread can get quite lengthy. The key here
> not alter the subject line which aids in keeping the posts associated
> each other. In this particular post, where the subject line does not
> what this thread is about, the subject should have been renamed and
> discussed as a separate issue since posting etiquette has nothing to do
> 2625w tubes. These reflectors are terrific!
> Thanks for your time,
> Tom K3TVC
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ron Lawrence KC4YOY" <kc4yoy at CAROLINA.RR.COM>
> To: <BOATANCHORS at LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV>
> Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 6:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [BOATANCHORS-TEMPE] GB> What BA's Use the 2625w Tube?
> > > Walt, I agree completly, the sharing of information is what these
> > lists are all about. Unless the reply is of a personal nature, I think
> > it should go to the list. All of the groups I have set up are set for
> > replies to go to the group, AWA, CC-AWA & TCA.
> > 73, Ron
This list is a public service of the City of Tempe, Arizona
Subscription control - http://www.tempe.gov/lists/control.asp?list=BOATANCHORS
To post - BOATANCHORS at LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV
Archives - http://listserv.tempe.gov/archives/BOATANCHORS.html
More information about the Boatanchors