On 1 May 2010 02:23, William Pietri <will...@scissor.com> wrote: > As long as we're on the topic of etiquette, I find it frustrating when > people pick out one particular bit to reply to and ignore the broader > point. I add that only because I'm not sure if this was part of your > intentional policy against niceness, or a more accidental sort.
I reply to those parts of a message that I have something to say in response to. I try to keep my correspondence concise (which, before anyone comments, doesn't necessarily mean short!), so I don't reply to something if I don't have anything to say that would further the discussion. This may be because I agree with what has been said, that I have no strong opinions on the matter, that I disagree but don't think I'm likely to change anybody's mind or any number of other reasons. I could reply purely to make my opinions known, but I don't see any benefit in people knowing my opinion just for the sake of it. (If them knowing my opinion is likely to make them take different action that I consider better, that would be a reason to reply.) If I have relevant factual information, then I will usually share it (for example, this email is sharing an explanation of my actions - that is relevant factual information). If it makes you feel better, you can assume I agree with anything I don't explicitly disagree with - it's not an accurate assumption, but it will rarely do any harm. Incidentally, I don't have a policy against niceness, just a lack of a policy in favour of it. I rarely go out of my way to offend people (sometimes it is an effective way of getting their attention, but rarely, since negative attention is usually of limited use). _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
