Offtopic posts are par for the game, of course. But it would be nice if people still put [OT] in the subject so that they landed in my Offtopic folder which I only paruse when I have nothing better to be doing (not very often these days).
On Wednesday 08 September 2004 05:40 pm, Jason Clinton wrote:
Offtopic posts are par for the game, of course. But it would be nice if people still put [OT] in the subject so that they landed in my Offtopic folder which I only paruse when I have nothing better to be doing (not very often these days).
Gee, I'm sorry Jason, we had not received notice of this important time-saving plan of yours, nor had we received the Official Judging Criteria by which we were supposed to pre-classify our posts for your convenience. Given the limited on-topic content of your own recent posts, I'm not surprized that this list poses a major time-management problem for you.
I do regret that we no-longer have accesss to your wit and skill, only your sarcasm remains.
Is this on topic? The audience is waiting your judgement with baited breath...
Jonathan Hutchins wrote:
On Wednesday 08 September 2004 05:40 pm, Jason Clinton wrote:
Offtopic posts are par for the game, of course. But it would be nice if people still put [OT] in the subject so that they landed in my Offtopic folder which I only paruse when I have nothing better to be doing (not very often these days).
Gee, I'm sorry Jason, we had not received notice of this important time-saving plan of yours, nor had we received the Official Judging Criteria by which we were supposed to pre-classify our posts for your convenience. Given the limited on-topic content of your own recent posts, I'm not surprized that this list poses a major time-management problem for you.
I do regret that we no-longer have accesss to your wit and skill, only your sarcasm remains.
Is this on topic? The audience is waiting your judgement with baited breath... _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
.
Reminds me of a Cat - ate Cheese and waited at the mouse hole with baited breath .
Oren
www.campdownunder.com
ObGodwin - " Where's the TopicNazi"
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 19:24, Jonathan Hutchins wrote:
On Wednesday 08 September 2004 05:40 pm, Jason Clinton wrote:
Offtopic posts are par for the game, of course. But it would be nice if people still put [OT] in the subject so that they landed in my Offtopic folder which I only paruse when I have nothing better to be doing (not very often these days).
Gee, I'm sorry Jason, we had not received notice of this important time-saving plan of yours, nor had we received the Official Judging Criteria by which we were supposed to pre-classify our posts for your convenience. Given the limited on-topic content of your own recent posts, I'm not surprized that this list poses a major time-management problem for you.
It's a request; not an edict. Had I the power to issue edicts (and it's probably good that I don't), you would have been banned from this list about two years ago.
As for the personal attacks, I'm sure that if you were to grep your mail logs you would find that all my posts (with exception to responding to Lucas and this one) in the last three months have been about computers.
As far as I'm concerned, the above crosses the acceptable behavior line.
The other 3 lug mailing lists I'm on require [OT] in the topic. I'm glad we have the freedom to not HAVE to place [OT] in the subjust, but it still would be nice :)
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 22:21, Jason Clinton wrote:
On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 19:24, Jonathan Hutchins wrote:
On Wednesday 08 September 2004 05:40 pm, Jason Clinton wrote:
Offtopic posts are par for the game, of course. But it would be nice if people still put [OT] in the subject so that they landed in my Offtopic folder which I only paruse when I have nothing better to be doing (not very often these days).
Gee, I'm sorry Jason, we had not received notice of this important time-saving plan of yours, nor had we received the Official Judging Criteria by which we were supposed to pre-classify our posts for your convenience. Given the limited on-topic content of your own recent posts, I'm not surprized that this list poses a major time-management problem for you.
It's a request; not an edict. Had I the power to issue edicts (and it's probably good that I don't), you would have been banned from this list about two years ago.
As for the personal attacks, I'm sure that if you were to grep your mail logs you would find that all my posts (with exception to responding to Lucas and this one) in the last three months have been about computers.
As far as I'm concerned, the above crosses the acceptable behavior line.
Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
-
Jason Clinton -
Jonathan Hutchins -
Oren Beck -
Tom Bruno