On 15/7/02 10:55 pm, "Harry Zink"  wrote:

>> If all the people who are complaining about his had declined the invitation
>> instead of ignoring it or accepting it, there wouldn't be this trouble now.
> 
> Blame the users, #2.
> 
> The fact remains, THERE IS THIS TROUBLE NOW.
> 
> Why?
> 
> Because, just maybe, a refinement of the notification mechanism might make
> this process a bit less invasive.

How could it be less invasive than turned off, if that's what you want?

> 
> I have been quite clear that only mailing lists are as susceptible to this,
> as the workflow of a mailing list allows such stuff to slip through (except
> in the case of the handful of perfect people on this list).

That applies to YOUR workflow. This is not necessarily the same as anyone
else's. 
> 
> A) It needs to be addressed.

I don't see this. I understand how it works, and it seems just fine to me.

> 
> B) None of you have anything to do with the MacBU, or are in any position to
> address this, so, essentially, your comments don't really matter.

And neither are you, so the same must apply to your comments :-)

> 
> Harry
> 

-- 
Barry Wainwright
<http://www.barryw.net>


"The key to being a good manager is keeping the people who hate me away from
those who are still undecided."  --  Casey Stengel



-- 
To unsubscribe:                     
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
archives:       
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.letterrip.com/>
old-archive:       
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>

Reply via email to