[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donald Burrill) wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> As regards inconvenience, it's much like the inconvenience that I > engender when I include the querent's ID as a Cc: in replying to a list > item. I am aware that the querent will receive two copies (one directly > from me, one via the list-serve), but (a) the <DELETE> key is easy to > find and (b) for mailers that report the "Cc:" line, other members of > the list can see whose note I am replying to, even if their mailers > otherwise delete that identification and supply "you wrote" instead of > the more informative "John Smith wrote". If you do this, though, it's *really* important to include some indication of it in the *body* of the message. Otherwise, because it's quite likely that the recipient will see the personal copy before the list copy, he/she may not be aware of the latter and wind up composing a response, sending it directly to you, and then realizing (after seeing the list copy of your message) that it should have gone to the entire list. . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
