RE: acronyms

From: Gough, Joshua (
Date: Fri Sep 26 2003 - 16:55:45 EDT

  • Next message: "RE: acronyms"

    You can always visit <>
    and see if it's listed ;)
    Here are a few familiar ones:
    If not add it to it and make everyone's life easier

     -----Original Message-----
    From: Iain Strachan []
    Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 2:28 PM
    To: SHEILA WILSON; George Murphy; Jan de Koning
    Subject: Re: acronyms

    Might I suggest as a means to produced a better tempered debate, that if you
    don't know what an acronym means, that you reply **OFF-LIST** to the
    original sender asking her/him to explain what the acronyms mean. This
    means we don't get into tedious discussions about whether to use acronyms
    and whether to explain them, and the rest of us don't have to put up with
    emails from people asking about acronyms that many of us know already.
    I for one don't think it's reasonable that every time you use a TLA (Three
    Letter Acronym) that you have to explain it in brackets over the first use.
    Much better that people who don't know them politely ask the originator
    privately what they mean. That way everyone gets up to speed reasonably
    TTFN. (If you want an explanation of this one, email me privately).

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 26 2003 - 16:56:54 EDT