Atis wrote in Article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
> Include offtopic@ in to, the same way as you include [OT] in subject.
> If you also answer on topic, just include both MLs.
Doesn't that entirely defeat the purpose of seperate mailing lists?
Wouldn't that also add an
Atis wrote in Article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
> What i have to propose - create separate ML for offtopic discussions.
Read the archives. This has been proposed many times with the same
rejection already: With the OT discussions go the users who can help. If
you w
On 6/1/07, Nyizsnyik Ferenc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Atis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What i have to propose - create separate ML for offtopic discussions.
Yes, but offtopic threads evolve from on-topic ones. It would be very
annoying to see posts like this:
... this is I could do to help
Nyizsnyik Ferenc wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 18:23:08 +0300
Atis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/1/07, Peter Gruessing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I thought this was a Debian Linux mailing list?>
Yes, this is, but there is often accusation, that this is list for
users of Debia
On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 18:23:08 +0300
Atis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/1/07, Peter Gruessing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I thought this was a Debian Linux mailing list?>
>
> Yes, this is, but there is often accusation, that this is list for
> users of Debian, and as such, may contain any
On 6/1/07, Peter Gruessing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I thought this was a Debian Linux mailing list?>
Yes, this is, but there is often accusation, that this is list for
users of Debian, and as such, may contain any discussions of Debian
users.
What i have to propose - create separate ML f
6 matches
Mail list logo
