Msg: 5613 *Conference*

01-02-95 11:51:37

From: RICHARD HANSON

To : TOM POWERS

Subj: REPLY TO MSG #5612 (DATE STAMP ISSUE)

Hmmm... I went back and reread my reply to you and didn't see anywhere where I
got mad or even a bit testie.  I do try to have at least one cup of coffee
before answering e-mail, and it appears that I was coffeed-up.  So, no problem
here.  You're okay ... keep up the good questions.

Over the years, many of us onliners have had discussions about the "terse"
nature of e-mail.  Beyond all other forms of communications, e-mail tends to be
very short, not well developped, sort of cryptic, with replies leaning to the
assumed side of communications, i.e., we "assume" that the reader "remembers"
what they asked.  Besides, we all think we are "correct" in the way we think,
act, talk, relate to the world ... well beyond self-centered, we never take the
time to think of the dynamics of the situation, or acknowledge each other as
complex.

Given the above, various methods developed to counter balance the negativeness
of e-mail.  Such measures include: faces :) roses -<-<-<--@ and other
emoticons, message threads <-> to read back through a thread, and lastly,
quotes ... exerps from the original message.  Sprinkle in a bunch of "thank
you" and "please" and "super" and other nifty words, use full sentences,
paragraphs, and punctuation ... and try to get all the spallign corect (sp) or
at least call attention to the fact that you couldn't find it in the dictionary
at that moment ... and we've cleaned up the act pretty well.

Of course, we "techies" tend to discuss something once and expect that once
said "everyone knows" ... move on.  Not!  And, of course, there are times when
we really are MAD AS HELL AND I WON'T TAKE IT ANYMORE ... that is called
flaming ... in the real world it may be called slander!

Lastly, at least in my case ... I run out of coffee ... then look out!! (grin)
-Rick-

PS: I brought this message out into the open since you raised an excellent
issue to kick off the new year.