 |
 |
I agree with Tracey whenever the issue at hand applies to procedures, policies, how do you do it, and information requests that might serve to educate a large number of folks. Maryly Snow Tracey Sams wrote: > Overall, I agree with Angela's point. However, I think it's also equally annoying to completely read through someone's request for assistance, or to read something of interest just to have that individual ask that the response be sent to them privately when the information could be potentially beneficial to other colleagues who are taking the time to read their requests in the first place. > Tracey Sams > Covington & Burling > Wasington, DC > >>> <[log in to unmask]> 07/22 10:53 AM >>> > Please, please, please can we show some common courtesy when responding to > queries which are of a personal nature or are of no interest to the rest of the > list. READ THE MESSAGE AND SEND YOUR REPLY TO THE INDIVIDUAL WHO WROTE IT. > Most of the time the sender asks that you do it anyway. Take the extra 10 1/2 > seconds to actually type in an address rather than just typing "reply." While > reading personal responses is on a rare occassion funny - Jim Emmett's > preference for "a woman's neck over a man's bum" and his reference to > "dangly bits" - they are usually just plain annoying. > > Angela Binda > Brandeis University > [log in to unmask]