1855 - was Re: Kindly reply at the bottom (was Re: JAVA Plugin Won't Work)
bishop at platypus.bc.ca
Tue Dec 16 11:28:02 UTC 2003
> Fortunately for *me*, I'm not on dial-up, or else I would have wasted a
> lot of time reading a message that didn't interest me.
Hmm. You break 1855 to complain about an 1855 violation.
Learning will help you see the other side of the discussion exists, a
realization that some ENTJs find difficult to make.
Learn about newspaper structuring, and learn to recognize the similarity
between the reply in an email chain and the summary on a forwarded
message. Then ask yourself why only one of them should be in the initial
page displayed by an MUA.
1855 gives no hard guide as to WHAT's extra, and the tone of an email can
be difficult to convey; I value everything that most people send me,
whatever's not tacked on by their MUA. If you think you know better than
the writer, that's fine with me. The first time you witness expensive
folly averted by new, objective eyes on an old email chain, 6 figures
saved because someone had the full context on a problem, then you'll have
learned that there is another alternative.
> "You only live once: let's make life BETTER for each other."
I had some people suggest the same idea to me one recent weekend. It was
still warm, I was in the middle of yet another honeydew project, and the
doorbell rings. These well-dressed people greet me hello, and then start
into a spiel about making the world a better place, and how I should take
a pamphlet or a magazine/comic/booklet and maybe hear a good story.
One, it's off-topic to the day's events. Two, I'm not so sure it's better
the other way, and I've tried both worlds. Three, one's preferences are
great, and people deserve life mottoes like corporations need mission
statements, but drawing attention to them seems a little .. ..
Now, don't make me get the hose.
[my other email address probably matches an existing killfile pattern,
More information about the users