RE: Reply quoted

Ken,

Sorry.  I think some of my comments may have been right to the point.  And I
did learn a fair bit about how digest works.  (And doesn't..  For example, I
saw the summary gives no indication of length of the post.)

However, I was WAY out of line to assume you were flaming me.

Again, sorry.

I understand your not wanting to be "list policeman", especially at times
when a lot of folks are breaking the rules.  (As it so happened, I let a
REAL LONG, REDUNDANT post slip out yesterday, myself.)  When you see a whole
lot of folks doing something that messes others up, I agree it's best to
post a comment to the list.

But I've had a few mentions privately, that I appreciated... especially the
ones that weren't primarily flames.  (I've had VERY few criticisms, BTW, and
find that extremely refreshing, given the volume (length, and/or tone ;-) of
some of my posts.)

Thanks for clarifying that, Ken.

Now I can get busy and start to work for Frank Kohlmann... ;D !

(zzzzzzz = $$$$$$$ :D)

jt

| -----Original Message-----
| From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
| [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Ken Sims
| Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 10:36 PM
| To: midrange-l@midrange.com
| Subject: RE: Reply quoted
|
|
| Hi JT -
|
| >Seen many good posts from you in the past.  However, this is
| just a rant...
|
| It wasn't intended to be just a rant, it was intended to get
| people to take
| a moment to stop and think about what they do.
|
| >I'll just take it for granted that my name was one you were
| tempted to name.
|
| Actually, no, I did NOT have you in mind.  I'm not talking about
| people who
| write long posts, I'm talking about people who click the reply button and
| type in a line or two at top, with the entirety of the received message
| below it by default.

<huge snip>