Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!NUSVM.BITNET!GBOPOLY1
From: GBOPOLY1@NUSVM.BITNET (fclim)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Replying directly or thro' the net
Message-ID: <8905090312.AA28760@umix.cc.umich.edu>
Date: 9 May 89 03:53:42 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 28
X-Unparsable-Date: Tue, 09 May 89 10:56:04 SST

Hi,
     I like to start a discussion here on the above matter.  In article,
<4834@uhnix1.uh.edu>, Larry W. Stone (cosc5zu%uhnix1%texbell.uucp@bellcore.
com) writes

>I would have replied directly on this, but the mailer here couldn't find your
>address. Hope this hasn't wasted too much space for anyone.

He was replying or was trying to reply to someone directly.  My opinion
is that everyone should reply thro' the net unless the first party request
a direct email; in the latter case, a cc should be made to the net.

A reply is usually generated by a query from someone.  Now, 3rd party
observers (like me) do not wish to send in a "me too, I would like to know
the answer to that as well".  Replying by means of this news group would
benefit others as well without those others sending in a "me too" note.
Furthermore, a reply *doesn't* waste space and time for everyone else
than a "me too" note.
The above does *not* apply to flames, of course.

Any comments, fellows??


fclim          --- gbopoly1 % nusvm.bitnet @ cunyvm.cuny.edu
computer centre
singapore polytechnic
dover road
singapore 0513.