Hi,
It seems my last message on this topic has stirred up a small storm, so to
let the dust settle I'll reply for the last time to this thread so I can
clarify some points a bit further.
[Per Nordenberg]
> Olaf, I'm pretty sure you've made a lot of us feel uncomfortable now
(incl.
> myself) when reading this. Although I agree on the "limitation of
senseless
> output generating" issue I'm not at all sure it's the right thing to tell
> us all that you are going to put a certain person in your killfile.
Please don't worry, so far I have not done such a thing, as I don't want to
miss messages from the list. However, if the list continues to bring heaps
of messages, I may feel forced to do so, as the amount of time I have for
reading the list is, unfortunately, very limited...:(
> It was a good thing though that you didn't mentioned this person by name.
I
> think it's up to each and every one of us who we put in our killfile.
Exactly. Besides, no harm done (yet), as I currently don't have a killfilter
on anyone of the list (I only use them for the "wonderful" spam mail I
receive, realising that by doing this I now completely miss out on at least
5 great opportunities a day to make $100K without doing anything for it,
yeah right! ;) )...
> BTW, I have never used this option, but then I have 2600+ unread
> mails in my inbox. :-(
For all the bashing that Microsuck products get, I must actually admit that
I like Outlook's inbox rules. Over here (at work) corporate policy requires
us to use Outlook because at work for our projects we have synchronised
calendars (etc.). For the Olympus list I've simply set up a rule which is
something like: "move messages sent to 'olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' to folder
Olympus list", this works really well, but it misses the ones from people
that use an alias for the list (such as "team OM"), so you'll probably find
yourself adding some 2 or 3 more rules, but then you're all set. This way I
can just read the Oly stuff when I have a break from work (or during the
nights/weekends), and it won't fill up my inbox...
Maybe a suggestion for you too?
[Keith Berry]
> On the subject of the thread, messages at the bottom of a short extract
(as
> above) are okay, but I find it irritating to scroll down reams of previous
> postings to find a response, and more so if there isn't one when I get to
> the bottom, as sometimes happens. That's my tuppence worth.
Yes, I've noticed that too. I don't know what happens with those messages.
Maybe the e-mail client messes up, or the person replying accidentally hits
the 'send' button prematurely (although normally there is no following
message to state that that happened)... No idea...
[Charles Loeven]
> *I don't care if the reply is before or after the quote,
> *Just use a quote and not the whole message.
> *There are exceptions of course, like taking it point by point.
> *The "whole story" is in the thread. No need to duplicate it.
Yes, same here, this sounds fair enough.
> *One liners make it fun and personable. Just use discretion.
I like the one-liners which have a good funny pun. Actually, I'd like to
quote something I stated in my original message: "In other words, maybe we
could stop sending one-liners that don't add any real value to a discussion,
an occasional off-hand joke, ala Ken Norton's style is o.k. and funny". I
miss Ken's funny jokes, and would like to see them back on the list. It
takes out the serious character of us only being interested in: comparing
lenses, bodies, counting lines, MC vs. SC, etc. So, these one-liners are
great and more than welcome, it's just the senseless one-liners that don't
add any value to a thread and aren't funny either, that I was referring to.
As you said: just use discretion...:/
> *No need to filter any individuals, and you may miss something of
interest.
Which is exactly why I haven't done it so far. I don't want to miss
anything, but on the other hand I need to employ some time-management...
> *DELETE
Which is what I'm currently doing to messages that don't interest me,
however, since I'm currently working at the client's site, we have to use
dial-up for Outlook, and since Outlook's synchronisation seems to need to
transfer 10 MB of data for getting some 50 messages, I often literally find
myself looking at the synchronisation screen for a good 15 minutes (seems to
be an Exchange server misconfiguration)...:(
> *Variety IS the spice of life.
> *This discussion does add value to the list. It clears the air.
Agreed.
> It has been suggested in the past to make some kind of rules here.
> It never happens (thank goodness). We should be able to conduct
> ourselves in a proper manner and not get too stuffy about it.
Well, I don't think we need a moderator, I would just like to see the
messages being limited to either relative content, an interesting sidetrack
or to a funny twist. An excellent example was Paul Schings' April fools
joke, as well as the ballerina of prose stuff...:)
Besides, I myself have also posted OT stuff (even stuff which wasn't about
photography at all), but I do try to keep the amount of OT-non-photography
related posts limited.
[Gary Lewis]
> All I have to say is that I prefer sugar in my Lemonaide.
> Therefore if this list ever decides to become humorless, then I'll be
> deleteing myself from a very enjoyable list.
As stated above, I also greatly enjoy good humour (what would this world be
without it?), so regarding this "I'd like to refer to my previous
statement"...;)
Alright, I hope this explains my thoughts (and my previous message) a bit
better; now let's get back to the order of the day and work through those 39
remaining messages...
Cheers!
Olafo
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|