From BenWaB3@aol.com Fri Mar 03 13:27:04 2000
Subject:Question/Suggestion

Mike W. wrote:


Well......er......uh.......I guess......um.......I don't know. I'm not
denying I said anything, it's just that I don't know what you're referring
to, which brings me to the point of this post: Is it possible for us to
utilize the reply privelege a bit more sparsely. Most of the messages in this
past digest had at least one whole previous posting attached, many of them 2
or more. You can read past the first article w/ quote arrows to get to the
new message & then when you think you're starting another new message you
realize it's the whole message the original whole message is replying to. It
gets kind of like Monty Python's "The people responsible for sacking the
original sackers have, themselves, been sacked". If we could just quote the
relevant parts for our replies (like the example in this posting) it would
make it much easier to navigate, plus save a lot of memory space too. It
might take a bit more time than just hitting respond for the whole post, but
would be much less confusing. Today's digest was over 80K. If we were still
chained to Commodore 64's & TRS 80's we'd be screwed. Just a suggestion. Now,
just exactly what was it that I originally said?

Ben (Dazed & Confused) Ninmann