From: Iain Strachan (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Sep 26 2003 - 14:45:54 EDT
I'm very much in agreement with Glenn here (miracle!) :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: Glenn Morton
To: Jan de Koning ; email@example.com
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 3:34 PM
Subject: RE: acronyms
The principle I think ought to be followed is this: Which takes the most work? To make everyone else type the same thing over and over again and again or for one person to simply ask a question. If one isn't willing to go to the work of simply sending one email or isn't curious enough about the topic to do that, then why should they suggest everyone else go to cumulatively huge amounts of work for the occasional time they don't understand an acronym? While I agree that acronyms appear which I don't understand, I would think it highly presumputuous for me to expect everyone else to go to that cumulatively huge effort to satisfy me when I am unwilling to do a simply amount of work and send an email.
And the irony is that an email gets send spamming the entire list with the information that you don't know what TTFN (or whatever means). The same amount of work goes into sending to the originator and saying
"What does TTFN mean"?
Just click "Reply" and not "Reply all".
Then all I have to do is to reply with
TTFN = Ta Ta For Now
& I don't have to qualify it & no one else has to wait for unnecessary emails to come flooding in down their internet connection.
(hoping that Ta Ta isn't just a British slang expression that's unknown "over the pond" :-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 26 2003 - 15:16:04 EDT