On Oct 12, 2009, at 4:36 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> My remark was somewhat jocular, but I am, sadly, not that far
> off. How about 3+% mislabelling? That would be enough if [NF] posts
> are not FoxPro posts. I suggest that they are not given what "NF"
> stands for.
Actually, people are pretty good about following the conventions. The
ones who don't stand out quite clearly.
> I have a backlog of ProFox posts from 2001 that I received but
> never read and that I have been slowly going through. The difference
> in tone is remarkable. The 2001 posts are, in general, quite polite
> and on-topic. A rude post is very unusual. It is rather different
> now. What changed?
Go through those and see how many are the current active posters on
the list. The [OT] stuff has been flooded by the loud and unthinking.
Actually, if you selectively filter the email, even the [OT] is quite
pleasant. If those few who insist on feeding the trolls didn't quote
those emails, I'd have an even better experience.
-- Ed Leafe
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
