On 16-11-2000 at 23:27:15GMT +0000 (which was 23:27 where I live)
Marck D. Pearlstone wrote regarding the subject of "Editing received messages"
Marck,
> Perhaps, but from what you say here, I don't think that you have
> clearly understood the nature of my response. Thank you for this
> opportunity to clarify what it meant for the non-native English
> readers.
This might be a problem sometimes ;-)
> I was mildly concerned that Doug posted his original enquiry using
> Calypso. Then he only replied to one of the responses he had received
> by promoting Calypso's features, once again using Calypso. Aren't you
> concerned that Doug didn't respond to your agreement that the feature
> is lacking?
True. And I didn't check what client he was using!
> Doug's only response was to ridicule the method Peter suggested for
> achieving the request. That isn't constructive. That's why I was harsh
> and that's *what* I was harsh about. I wasn't harsh about the request.
> I wasn't harsh about the feature.
True again.
ME>> And changing the email is one of such things. I have requested
ME>> this myself.
> I know. I have seen the request ;-). I don't agree with it <shrug>,
> but that was *not* the harsh element of my post. Have another look at
> it bearing in mind what I have said here. The section of my response
> discussing the theory of changing a received mail was purely in the
> spirit of the debate. Honestly.
No offense taken! Thanks for clarifying your point of view, this is good
style (and this is why you're a good moderator).
ME>> There are no 2 equal users. One wants one feature, which the other
ME>> hates. This is called: democracy
> Of course. And I have exerted my democratic right to state an opinion
> on the subject :-).
ME>> And yes I think that Becky has it's nice touches, which I would
ME>> like to see in TheBat, *because I want to keep TheBat*.
> Exactly. But here's what I think you may have missed: if Doug had
> shown that he wanted to improve TB, I would not have written as I did.
> He did *not* seem to be showing that at all. I responded as befits my
> suspicions and left space to have been wrong about it.
> BTW: I still believe that am correct about it being intrinsically
> "wrong" to edit received messages for filing. I also accept that I am
> probably in the minority in holding that position :-).
No, I think you are generally correct on this.
BUT I have had the need to edit one or the other email I have received
(business stuff) not to change it's contents but to add some memo stuff to
the end of it, like notes from a phone conversation. (e.g. when I sent
prices to a client and then change some stuff afterwards I'd like to jot
this down on the original email so that I have a record of it). Perhaps
there's a better way to do. And for this I have used the feature in Eudora
where I come from and I miss it here too.
Best Regards
--
Manfred Ell
using TheBat 1.48 Beta/6 on Windows 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1, RC 1.1
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : [email protected]
