The good point about getting replies, is that you read about the problems
but you are very often lucky to find solutions. And, I do count on the
inclusion of the original list, in order to minimize the number of
messages to handle ... I only keep one mail!

I wouldn't stand on this mailing-list if the problems were sent publicly
and the solutions privately ... hearing of other people problems
sometimes helps, (they say!) but I think I have enough problems to cope
with in everyday life ::)

Mauro

> Bernd,
>
> >Nice thoughts, but I think the biggest problem of this list is the
> >unneccessary inclusion of text from previous postings.   Take your
> >message (sorry, Bill) as an example:  New contents: 36 lines. Total
> >length: 98 lines.
> >
> >[...deleted...]
> >
> >I agree.
> >Just my $0.02,
> >Bernd
>
> Point taken.  This is a "working style" difference for those who use
digest
> and those who don't.  If you don't use digest, it's far more convenient
to
> see the entire included message and all the predecessors directly below
the
> new entry.  This is particularly true for those of us who may be absent
for
> the list for a week at a time and then come back in the middle of a
> conversation.
>
> If you use digest, having all of the included message is a real pain.
On
> the other hand, I found myself going back a day or two in the digest to
find
> references when they weren't complete in the new posting, but that's a
> discipline issue for the responder.
>
> I understand both arguments because I've used both methods, direct and
> digest.  We've had the discussion here before, too.  I think the
non-digest
> votes won last time.  That was when I was using digest. :(
>
> I've found that using Word with Outlook is great for this list because
it
> changes all the previously included message to a different color than
the
> new text.  Now that I'm not using digest, I don't mind either having
the
> entire message included or having the references inserted in the text.
The
> two things that are important, however, is that the references be
complete
> and/or the included message is at the end.
>
> But that's just my opinion.  I could be wrong.
>
> Bill