[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: sauropods: homotherm,heterotherm or gigantotherm?



Oh, here is it...

No hard feelings, eh. :-)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jaime A. Headden" <qilongia@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 2:43 AM

David Marjanovic (david.marjanovic@gmx.at) wrote:

<Why??? That person is on the list, so they will get a copy anyway. Plus, I
have always despised and detested politeness anyway. :-)>


Because some listmembers get their emails in the form of a single post at the
beginning of the morning, in digest form, rather than distributed throughout
the day. I used to do this, and while I switched over for the sake of
individual emails, still others continue this practice (and the same is true
for the vrtpaleo list, as well). Such courteous replies allow them to recieve
emails addressed to them before they ever catch the digest, and thus response
is quicker.

Good point. However, how many people get digests...? I don't, just for the record...


<Usually I get both copies in the same second or in two successive seconds.
This only changes when Yahoo! is overloaded (and the sender and/or the list
uses Yahoo!), which is rare, or on the days when massive virus attacks slow the
whole Internet down>


 Some people use slower servers, so a direct email may arrive
faster than a group email.

Shouldn't it be slower than a group e-mail then?

<Only makes sense if one (or more) of those is not a list member.>

I have sent emails specifically to people on topics they find of concern who
WERE simply because if would either 1) prompt a response they may not
otherwise give,

I don't think this is common...

or 2) respond to me because I am bringing it up to them,

When your reply is onlist anyway...

and 3) they might not otherwise response to me or the list had I not.

This is the case if they don't get mail from the list or maybe if they get digests. It's somewhat hard to imagine in other cases.


In this case, it encourages communication. As I said, politeness.

<You are misled in several ways about this "courtesy" thing. :-)>

 You're not a Buddhist. I tend to be very polite simply as a matter of
societal respect.

Sorry for being so frank, and for exaggerating the size of the problem, but, qualitatively, sending everyone everything twice is closer to spamming than to politeness. When politeness becomes the opposite of friendliness, it must be destroyed, or things will happen like people killing each other (or themselves) for "reasons" of honor, privately or in the form of impressively big wars.