From: Andy Shellam

>> And I was pointing out that this would not be a valid
>> test when there is a caching DNS on the LAN.

> I also pointed out how to avoid caching issues - the
> comment was aimed at the author of the message before mine.
>> Too much of the conversation and most of the attribution
>> was stripped too early for this to be coherent.
> Why the negativity?  A question was asked and several
> possible solutions were provided based on that original
> question.  All the "conversation" was relevant IMO.

But long before it was done it was impossible to tell who had asked
which questions, who had provided which answers and who had countered
those answers. In several instances, replies appeared to be directed to
the wrong individuals.

Some people here tend to go way too far when trimming context from
replies. Yes, I know it gets difficult to read when there are more than
ten or twelve levels of attribution, but stripping all but the last
layer is even worse. Removing the participants names from the top should
be a hanging offense. I don't keep copies of every message in any of the
dozens of mailing lists and news groups I follow, so there is no simple
way to go back through the conversation to figure out where it all came

Bob McConnell

PHP General Mailing List (
To unsubscribe, visit:

Reply via email to