rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
You ever reply to an email on these lists, not knowing that
someone else already replied pretty much in the same fashion?
I'll give them a one or two break - since they were different
authors.

Still, there is a little flogging of the lame, (if not dead),
horse.

Consider in this case however, that each of the vendor replies did not thread under the original message... purposely, or not.

Posting to effect [the appearance of] a new message could be nothing more than a tactic, for ensuring message visibility of their messages over tho others which remain threaded. One would expect that their replies would thread properly, just as is seen with other messages even if\when the subject line had changed. However none of those messages has a /References:/ message number, as though there was no intention to /reply/ versus simply posting a new message. When messages do not thread, e.g. as new vs reply, it is difficult to effect message-thread actions like either /mark thread as read/ or /kill thread/.

These recent replies seem like a car dealership parking some of their cars on another business's parking lot, with their "for sale" signs prominently displayed, in order to achieve visibility at the alternate venue. Could be both legal and strategic, but IMO would be in poor taste. Simply put, their replies look like SPAM to me. They need not be concerned for my opinion however, because I am not a decision maker for any organization.

Regards, Chuck

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].