In a message dated 2009.11.05 21:59 -0500, NoOp wrote:
On 11/05/2009 03:39 PM, John Kaufmann wrote:
In a message dated 2009.11.05 17:52 -0500, James E. Lang wrote:
I've just looked at the archives and it is not a newbie friendly place either.
Indeed not ;-) - and the search facility is both primitive and buggy.
In what way(s)?
Perhaps you did not see my reply to Paul, who recommended that I search
the archive for posts about the limitations of moderators. What I found
was that the search capability seems primitive in the sense of
limitations (like a single search token) and buggy at least in the sense
that the search token is limited to ? characters, which limitation is
not made clear to the user. [In that example, my search string was
"moderators"; it was matched most often by the string "moderated".]
1. Are you agreeing that this list is not a newby friendly place?
Never! - sorry I did not pick up on the "either" in James' post. I was
referring to the archive; the list is amazingly - even painfully ;-) -
helpful to newbies. I could not be more appreciative of the cadre of
people who give so much to this list. That's why I'm so sensitive to
their time being wasted on list malfunction. (I doubt you can imagine
the high regard I have for you and quite a few other persons around here
- whom I will not name only because I would be afraid to forget someone.)
As for the rest of your post, I'm so sorry that my comment about the
archive (please try the example I gave) was misconstrued as a comment on
the list. I blame that on my carelessness - making a quick comment that
can be misconstrued as flippancy - not on your reading of my comment.
For the sloppiness of that, I deeply and humbly apologize.
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
