[Blair]
>As for context, I recommend a threaded newsreader.
[...]
[Blair]
>I do so when it's necessary and efficient, to me. When it's not,
>I won't bother.
[...]


This whole thread would be a great case study for an "Effective
Communication Skills" seminar.

"What we have here.... is a failure... to communicate"
(cant figure out how to put that southern drawl in there)

Not quoting pertinent points in a long thread is simply ineffective
communications. Consider these points:

1) It is a fallacy to "assume" that readers will have a threaded
Usenet client.

2) Don't assume that your audience is even Usenet savvy. The
proliferation of various http Usenet clients has opened the door to
many users who do not even know what the Usenet is, or for that matter
what a "thread" is.

3) Even if the reader does have a threaded client it is inconsiderate
to force them to sort through any number of previous posts just to
understand your context.

4) It is widely accepted and time honored "Netiquette" to judicially
quote the context in a threaded medium. Hundreds upon hundreds of
resources can be found that clearly document this, for instance
http://www.mindspring.com/~frites/repl.htm or
http://www.zedtoo.demon.co.uk/jcode/basic.html
and I highly recommend reading http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html
in its entirety.

The bottom line is if your intended audience does not understand your
context then you are NOT communicating effectively. If you don't care
about communicating effectively then why bother at all?

That's my 2 cents worth,

Mike Petro
www.pu-erh.net





Mike Petro
http://www.pu-erh.net

>This whole thread would be a great case study for an "Effective
>Communication Skills" seminar.

Only in the sense that nobody quite understands that
I'm perfectly happy with not making things easier for you.

If you need a threaded newsreader, get one.

--Blair

On 8 Jan 2006 20:44:27 -0800, "Blair P. Houghton"
> wrote:

>>This whole thread would be a great case study for an "Effective
>>Communication Skills" seminar.
>
>Only in the sense that nobody quite understands that
>I'm perfectly happy with not making things easier for you.
>
>If you need a threaded newsreader, get one.
>
>--Blair

Actually I have one of the finest threaded newsreaders available for
the Windows platform (Forte Agent). Unfortunately it does not
compensate for inconsiderate people who stubbornly refuse to observe
proper protocol.

On the other hand "Forte Agent" does include a very effective
killfile. You see, if you don't care enough to even attempt to observe
proper netiquette then I really don't care what you have to say......
Mike Petro
http://www.pu-erh.net

Ignore whatever you want, just don't come crying to me when you turn up
ignorant.

--Blair

Ya know, Blair, I started out this little flame war on your side. I agree
that Google can be cumbersome. Unfortunetly the below comment "I'm perfectly
happy with not making things easier for you" turned the tide. You could have
kept me rooting on your side (whether you cared I did or not) by simply
being polite. I'm sorry Google groups makes that difficult for you as well.
Also "If you need a threaded newsreader, get one." is an interesting one,
seeing as I have a threaded newsreader, and I still have no clue to what
your original post was in reference to.
Marlene
> >This whole thread would be a great case study for an "Effective
>>Communication Skills" seminar.
>
> Only in the sense that nobody quite understands that
> I'm perfectly happy with not making things easier for you.
>
> If you need a threaded newsreader, get one.
>
> --Blair
>