Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Replying\s+to\s+the\s+list\.\.\.AGAIN\!\s*$/: 31 ]

Total 31 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: Dino Darling <k6rix@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:58:41 -0700
The message below was in reference to "cutting aluminum tubes". Here the poster had a very good question and received a good number of replies! I would have liked to see these replies as I'm sure I c
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00527.html (9,555 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:43:33 -0500
I strongly agree, and I almost never reply directly to the original poster of a question. If I do, it is by mistake (or because I specifically want the reply to be private). I really think that the d
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00531.html (8,762 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Gary McDuffie, Sr." <mcduffie@actcom.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:55:15 -0600
I've always figured that the question was asked here, and should be answered here. My replies all are via the reply command and I quickly wipe out the personal address and replace it with tt, which i
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00535.html (9,075 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Robert Shauger" <rgshauger@myyellowstone.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 11:56:47 -0700
I suspect that some people may reply in private to avoid possible flame comments. There are others that seem to delight in that kind of activity. Just my two cents. 73, Bob W7KD the of a question. If
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00536.html (10,011 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: RWMaylott@aol.com
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:06:17 EDT
I strongly DISAGREE. Replies should go to the requester ONLY. I had no interest in "cutting aluminum tubes" and deleted the original plus all replies, unread. A good policy is for the original reques
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00537.html (7,915 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: Blake Bowers <bbowers@townsqr.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 14:11:49 -0500
Of course the question begs to be asked, why did you reply to the list? _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00538.html (6,962 bytes)

7. RE: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Keith Dutson" <kjdutson@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:12:11 -0500
I think it should be a matter of convenience to the majority of list participants. I can plainly see your vote is to not reply to the list, but do not understand the reasoning behind your choice from
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00539.html (10,152 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Gary McDuffie, Sr." <mcduffie@actcom.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 14:29:33 -0600
And I strongly disagree with you. Like you, I had/have no interest in the aluminum tubing thread and deleted each one as they came in, still am. I just checked and don't see any blood on me anywhere.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00540.html (8,279 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 <faunt@panix.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 17:36:58 -0400 (EDT)
And I strongly disagree with you. Like you, I had/have no interest in the aluminum tubing thread and deleted each one as they came in, still am. I just checked and don't see any blood on me anywhere.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00545.html (8,574 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Dean Craft" <w4ihk@mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 18:29:26 -0400
wade A rather elitist attitude I must say. Why is that what I have to say is probably 'trash' while what you want to read is an 'item of interest'? Your presence on the list puzzles me. How does that
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00546.html (9,422 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Gary McDuffie, Sr." <mcduffie@actcom.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 16:49:31 -0600
This grouchy olden farte agrees with you. The key point, I think, is that the archives are useless if they only refer to the question and never show answers. A topic I'm not interested in today, may
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00547.html (8,352 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: Alan AB2OS <ab2os@att.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 19:32:09 -0400
Amen from yet another (G?)OF. Alan AB2OS On 07/20/04 06:49 pm Gary McDuffie, Sr. put fingers to keyboard and launched the following message into cyberspace: This will probably get me kicked off the l
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00548.html (9,015 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Jerry Keller" <k3bz@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 19:58:07 -0400
How could any of us possibly know if a posting is of interest or not if it is sent direct and not to the reflector? Sometimes a poster asks for responses to go direct, and that takes some judgement,
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00550.html (10,296 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Tower (K8RI)" <tower@rogerhalstead.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 21:09:45 -0400
IMO, "Anything" of general interest, or a general interest topic should go to the group. Although this is not a technical thread it is of general interest. Sure there's a lot in which I have no inter
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00552.html (9,344 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 20:51:55 -0500
Yes, but perhaps they have thinner skins than they should. A reply is NOT a flame if it says "I think you're wrong and here's why." That's peer review, and it helps keep all of us straight. It preven
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00553.html (9,037 bytes)

16. RE: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: Bill Aycock <baycock@direcway.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 23:16:05 -0500
For what my opinion is worth-- I think the list should be set to "reply to list" I learn a LOT from other peoples problems and the (Usually experience-based) solutions. This list has some of the most
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00559.html (9,355 bytes)

17. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Tim Makins, EI8IC" <contesting@eircom.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 08:40:07 +0100
Here here. Please change the settings ASAP. This list is all about knowledge of Towers. If we don't all share that knowledge, we may as well close the list down. In an ideal world, people would send
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00561.html (10,674 bytes)

18. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Bill VanAlstyne" <w5wvo@cybermesa.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 10:55:45 -0600
Jim, this is the most spot-on comment I've seen on this thread. To paraphrase another poster to whom I responded a few days back, I think this is the "definitive" answer to the reply-to-list question
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00562.html (10,367 bytes)

19. Re: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: j4976@juno.com
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:00:42 -0500
I am new to all this, and I subscribed with the hope of learning something. If replies are not public, I learn nothing. I understand how much mail this reflector gives us all to sort through, but for
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00563.html (10,535 bytes)

20. RE: [TowerTalk] Replying to the list...AGAIN! (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, K4IK" <k4ik@subich.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:23:12 -0400
... because the lists at contesting.com are not democracies. As far as I know ALL of the lists @ contesting.com were set up to "reply to sender" by default. As the administrator of two of the lists
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00564.html (9,494 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu