Miata Mailing List: November 1996, Message #213
sponsored by



     



   From: jeffanderson@juno.com (Jeff Anderson)

Subject: Re: Public Posting of Private Messages (Sometimes just an

   Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 12:28:17 -0500



On this @JUNO I'm using now I can't easily tell if a message has come in

to me from the list or direct privately.  Others may have the same

problem. 



It's a real problem knowing if the message was meant to be public or

private.  Mail headers are not displayed unless they are requested and

when displayed are hard to properly decipher and it's also harder to read

the text.   



Some time ago I was having what I thought was a private exchange but

later found his replies posted to the list with copies of my e-mails

included.  I was more than a little disturb about this -- he said that he

didn't realize that I was sending to him privately and apologized

profusely.  



I had a hard time believing that his motive was not meant to be vicious. 

But now that I see how this @JUNO server's e-mail works I believe that

his may have been working in a similar way and he just plain didn't have

the easy ability to see that messages were being sent to him directly and

not to through the list.



This is one of the reasons I ask that e-mail to me be sent to my @EROLS

e-mail and not to @JUNO.  



When we had a Gopher for the list on the Miata.net it worked great for my

applications -- now I use this free @JUNO as a poor substitute for the

dead Gopher menu. 



I sure wish we still had that Gopher!



Thanks for your post Carl  -- it's true.



Jeff Anderson              

91 Silver, 92 Blue, MCA, M-Club 97



Don't e-mail me to  this @JUNO address.

I use @JUNO for only getting the list and don't always read all.



Bad head rest sound Curer and Miata Special antenna splitters for CB: 

reply/request info to janderso@erols.com (<= only)











On Sun, 3 Nov 1996 02:51:33 -0500 rotag69@grove.ufl.EDU (CDB) writes:



---snip ---

>One thing to keep in mind is that the posting to the server may have 

>been an

>innocuous error with no intent to harm, in such case banishment could 

>be too

>harsh a punishment.  The only effective means of control is, indeed, 

>self

>restraint...and also the conveyance of the sender's wishes...  If you 

>replyy

>to a message on the listserv one may think that the message was 

>mistakenly

>not sent to the server so, if an issue is sensitive it would be wise 

>to note

>your wishes in the body of the message, so the possibility of

>misunderstanding is eld to an explicit minimum...

>

>Carl

>

>Alexis - 1993 Brilliant Black 'C













\014

==============================================================================