Jack Barnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I haven't been following this thread at all, some "short answer" me on > the question > "Is it proper edict to Cc: or not to Cc:?" On a mailing list, I would say no Cc unless the author has specifically requested responses sent direct to the author. So you should reply only to the list. It is also proper edict to not quote irrelevant parts of the previous post. -- ---Regards, Steve Youngs--------Email:-<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>--- | If Microsoft is the answer, then all I can say is that | | you are asking the wrong question. | ------------------------------<Don't be a Newbie--Be a Gnu-bie>---
- re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Rik Osborne
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Steve Youngs
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Robbie Scherer
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Steve Youngs
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Mike
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Steve Youngs
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Ray Olszewski
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Jack Barnett
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? John Aldrich
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Steve Youngs
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Steve Youngs
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Steve Youngs
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Mail Lists
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Rik Osborne
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Steve Youngs
- Re: Why reply to list and Cc author? Rik Osborne
