exit note
Question:
"Robert" <rg…@commspeeddemon.net> wrote in message
news:1045521588.608647@news.commspeed.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > Beth: > > This is not your private group. > Exactly the point. This is not a moderated group so people can post what the > want and they will react differently than you think they should or how you > would expect them to. > > I am trying to understand the culture of the group. > You are the culture of the group. Just be yourself. It also helps to be as > understanding and courteous as you can. As you have no doubt noticed, not > all people do that. That will only have a negative affect on the NG, but as > you pointed out, that the nature of the beast! > > This is not unreasonable. There have been several threads about > > grouchy, snotty, belligerent answers being directed toward new posters. > I haven’t felt that way. But you should realize, because of the nature of > NG’s in general, you can’t be thinned skinned, or you are likely to get > yourself into trouble. IMHO, I’m thinking that’s what happened between Beth > and Jacqueline, I think they both let things get under their skin a bit. And > then everyone else jumps into the fray. It happens on NG’s from time to > time, even among people with good intentions. > Then there are the trolls …. > > This appears to be a real case. If it is, then it should be either dealt > > with or addressed. > Who is going to deal with it? You? Best to just drop it and go on. The more > you meddle, the more people will be offended. > > People can object, go along with it, kill file people > > who are belligerent, etc. The grouchiness in the "alt" hierarchy are > > inherent to the beast, but in some groups, it seems to be more blatant, > > almost like it is accepted and accepted. > The nature of NG’s! Get used to it or get out! Gotta learn to ignore some > people, even when the nature of their message is "challenging" in nature. > (Yeah, right! What exactly am I doing right now??? <g>) > > If that is the case here, then > > some of us may want to go elsewhere or ignore those who are grouchy. So, > in > > short, it is a very relevant topic even if it has been settled. > It’s settled between Beth and Jacqueline, so it’s time to drop it and go on. > I have found that with e-mail and especially NG’s, it is very easy to be > misunderstood. Probably about 90% of communications is body language, which > you lose here. Very difficult to determine the actual intent of the author > without the body language. Better to assume the best of intentions unless > the language expressly indicate otherwise. > Robert
I thought Robert’s comments were excellent! This will be my ONLY comment on the past month or so of tedious unproductive emails, I recommend the following (this is what I practice after a few rants of my own) and it doesn’t matter if you are a newbie, midbie, or oldbie: If you write a post that is written while you don’t feel well or even worse are mad, put it in a Draft Folder and look at it again in a day or so (you may not want to send it). If you feel the need to write how inappropriate someone(s) post are and you aren’t the poster or postee, put it in a Draft Folder and weekly delete the contents (no one needs your help stirring things up). Please realize that a lot of us are depressed, tired and just feel like crapola and don’t need this. Post something helpful or funny or do all a favor and take a short break from the group. Thanks. Mike
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Robert wrote: > > Beth: > > This is not your private group. > Exactly the point. This is not a moderated group so people can post what the > want and they will react differently than you think they should or how you > would expect them to. > > I am trying to understand the culture of the group. > You are the culture of the group. Just be yourself. It also helps to be as > understanding and courteous as you can. As you have no doubt noticed, not > all people do that. That will only have a negative affect on the NG, but as > you pointed out, that the nature of the beast! > > This is not unreasonable. There have been several threads about > > grouchy, snotty, belligerent answers being directed toward new posters. > I haven’t felt that way. But you should realize, because of the nature of > NG’s in general, you can’t be thinned skinned, or you are likely to get > yourself into trouble. IMHO, I’m thinking that’s what happened between Beth > and Jacqueline, I think they both let things get under their skin a bit. And > then everyone else jumps into the fray. It happens on NG’s from time to > time, even among people with good intentions. > Then there are the trolls …. > > This appears to be a real case. If it is, then it should be either dealt > > with or addressed. > Who is going to deal with it? You? Best to just drop it and go on. The more > you meddle, the more people will be offended. > > People can object, go along with it, kill file people > > who are belligerent, etc. The grouchiness in the "alt" hierarchy are > > inherent to the beast, but in some groups, it seems to be more blatant, > > almost like it is accepted and accepted. > The nature of NG’s! Get used to it or get out! Gotta learn to ignore some > people, even when the nature of their message is "challenging" in nature. > (Yeah, right! What exactly am I doing right now??? <g>) > > If that is the case here, then > > some of us may want to go elsewhere or ignore those who are grouchy. So, > in > > short, it is a very relevant topic even if it has been settled. > It’s settled between Beth and Jacqueline, so it’s time to drop it and go on. > I have found that with e-mail and especially NG’s, it is very easy to be > misunderstood. Probably about 90% of communications is body language, which > you lose here. Very difficult to determine the actual intent of the author > without the body language. Better to assume the best of intentions unless > the language expressly indicate otherwise. > Robert
Robert…… this was an excellent post. One thing I would like to add is that since this NG deals with a very serious health issue, many people sometimes answers in words or terms that they wouldn’t have used the day before or the day after! Sleep disorders can be very debilitating and can seriously affect peoples judgements and responses. Many here are very ill and aren’t at their best all of the time. Many here are here almost as a place of last resort having been bounced around by a medical system that knows little about their problems. In short, we are sometimes at our worst and you must take this into account when reading and posting here. This can be difficult at the best of times, but when you are on a ‘downer’ day/week, etc. it becomes next to impossible. That is why the NG name includes ’support’. We need to try to support each other, but it can be difficult and it is hard to try on anothers shoes when you can’t even find your own. I hope you hang around as you certainly add to the community of the group. Regards Lee in Toronto ———–== Posted via Newsfeed.Com – Uncensored Usenet News ==———- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–
Response:
Hi Rob: There is not really much to answer here, as I generally agree, but I wanted to answer at least a bit: "Robert" <rg…@commspeeddemon.net> wrote in message
news:1045521588.608647@news.commspeed.net… <snip> >> I am trying to understand the culture of the group. > You are the culture of the group. Just be yourself. It also helps to be as > understanding and courteous as you can. As you have no doubt noticed, not > all people do that. That will only have a negative affect on the NG, but as > you pointed out, that the nature of the beast!
Every group does have a culture, so it is good to understand the culture before posting. That is "alt" 101. Every newsgroup that has frequent posters has a culture that you can either tolerate, join, or leave alone. Being that I am not at all thin skinned, I frankly don’t worry about it, but I do feel badly for those who do get hurt. Being that I am not thin skinned, I am not afraid to tell the self-appointed emperors that they are stark naked. <snip> > > This appears to be a real case. If it is, then it should be either dealt > > with or addressed. > Who is going to deal with it? You? Best to just drop it and go on. The more > you meddle, the more people will be offended.
There are several ways that it can be dealt with. One is that people who are active in the group can tell people that they do not accept that behavior. Peer pressure can be effective in any group, especially a support group. As a group, people can deal with unruly memebers of the group by either letting them know that they will not accept their behavior or "mass-ignoring" the person, both of which I have seen be effective in dealing with people who are acting in a way that takes away from the group. > > People can object, go along with it, kill file people > > who are belligerent, etc. The grouchiness in the "alt" hierarchy are > > inherent to the beast, but in some groups, it seems to be more blatant, > > almost like it is accepted and accepted.
See, like I said…. 
God bless, Joe <><
Response:
(snippage) <<<<<I have found that with e-mail and especially NG’s, it is very easy to be misunderstood. Probably about 90% of communications is body language, which you lose here. Very difficult to determine the actual intent of the author without the body language. Better to assume the best of intentions unless the language expressly indicate otherwise. Robert>>>>> Thank you Robert, for that clarifying post. ……………… Beth and Jacqueline, I am glad that everything is getting (or has gotten?) cleared up and we no longer have to (as some of us feel) defend one or the other. and Hopefully Jacqueline will realize that this is just the "nature of the beast" and will continue to grace us with her presence. Cindy
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Lori&Mike wrote: > "Robert" <rg…@commspeeddemon.net> wrote in message > news:1045521588.608647@news.commspeed.net… > > > Beth: > > > This is not your private group. > > Exactly the point. This is not a moderated group so people can post what the > > want and they will react differently than you think they should or how you > > would expect them to. > > > I am trying to understand the culture of the group. > > You are the culture of the group. Just be yourself. It also helps to be as > > understanding and courteous as you can. As you have no doubt noticed, not > > all people do that. That will only have a negative affect on the NG, but as > > you pointed out, that the nature of the beast! > > > This is not unreasonable. There have been several threads about > > > grouchy, snotty, belligerent answers being directed toward new posters. > > I haven’t felt that way. But you should realize, because of the nature of > > NG’s in general, you can’t be thinned skinned, or you are likely to get > > yourself into trouble. IMHO, I’m thinking that’s what happened between Beth > > and Jacqueline, I think they both let things get under their skin a bit. And > > then everyone else jumps into the fray. It happens on NG’s from time to > > time, even among people with good intentions. > > Then there are the trolls …. > > > This appears to be a real case. If it is, then it should be either dealt > > > with or addressed. > > Who is going to deal with it? You? Best to just drop it and go on. The more > > you meddle, the more people will be offended. > > > People can object, go along with it, kill file people > > > who are belligerent, etc. The grouchiness in the "alt" hierarchy are > > > inherent to the beast, but in some groups, it seems to be more blatant, > > > almost like it is accepted and accepted. > > The nature of NG’s! Get used to it or get out! Gotta learn to ignore some > > people, even when the nature of their message is "challenging" in nature. > > (Yeah, right! What exactly am I doing right now??? <g>) > > > If that is the case here, then > > > some of us may want to go elsewhere or ignore those who are grouchy. So, > > in > > > short, it is a very relevant topic even if it has been settled. > > It’s settled between Beth and Jacqueline, so it’s time to drop it and go on. > > I have found that with e-mail and especially NG’s, it is very easy to be > > misunderstood. Probably about 90% of communications is body language, which > > you lose here. Very difficult to determine the actual intent of the author > > without the body language. Better to assume the best of intentions unless > > the language expressly indicate otherwise. > > Robert > I thought Robert’s comments were excellent! This will be my ONLY comment > on the past month or so of tedious unproductive emails, I recommend the following > (this is what I practice after a few rants of my own) and it doesn’t matter if you > are a newbie, midbie, or oldbie: > If you write a post that is written while you don’t feel well or even worse are > mad, put it in a Draft Folder and look at it again in a day or so (you may not > want to send it). > If you feel the need to write how inappropriate someone(s) post are and you aren’t > the poster or postee, put it in a Draft Folder and weekly delete the contents (no > one needs your help stirring things up). > Please realize that a lot of us are depressed, tired and just feel like crapola > and don’t need this. Post something helpful or funny or do all a favor and take a > short break from the group. Thanks. Mike
IMHO, excellent advice.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Robert wrote: > > Beth: > > This is not your private group. > Exactly the point. This is not a moderated group so people can post what the > want and they will react differently than you think they should or how you > would expect them to. > > I am trying to understand the culture of the group. > You are the culture of the group. Just be yourself. It also helps to be as > understanding and courteous as you can. As you have no doubt noticed, not > all people do that. That will only have a negative affect on the NG, but as > you pointed out, that the nature of the beast! > > This is not unreasonable. There have been several threads about > > grouchy, snotty, belligerent answers being directed toward new posters. > I haven’t felt that way. But you should realize, because of the nature of > NG’s in general, you can’t be thinned skinned, or you are likely to get > yourself into trouble. IMHO, I’m thinking that’s what happened between Beth > and Jacqueline, I think they both let things get under their skin a bit. And > then everyone else jumps into the fray. It happens on NG’s from time to > time, even among people with good intentions. > Then there are the trolls …. > > This appears to be a real case. If it is, then it should be either dealt > > with or addressed. > Who is going to deal with it? You? Best to just drop it and go on. The more > you meddle, the more people will be offended. > > People can object, go along with it, kill file people > > who are belligerent, etc. The grouchiness in the "alt" hierarchy are > > inherent to the beast, but in some groups, it seems to be more blatant, > > almost like it is accepted and accepted. > The nature of NG’s! Get used to it or get out! Gotta learn to ignore some > people, even when the nature of their message is "challenging" in nature. > (Yeah, right! What exactly am I doing right now??? <g>) > > If that is the case here, then > > some of us may want to go elsewhere or ignore those who are grouchy. So, > in > > short, it is a very relevant topic even if it has been settled. > It’s settled between Beth and Jacqueline, so it’s time to drop it and go on. > I have found that with e-mail and especially NG’s, it is very easy to be > misunderstood. Probably about 90% of communications is body language, which > you lose here. Very difficult to determine the actual intent of the author > without the body language. Better to assume the best of intentions unless > the language expressly indicate otherwise. > Robert
I’ve manged to stay out, but let me say , Amen.
Response:
I’ve watched this thread, and a few others. It’s really disturbing to me, in all honesty. I haven’t really said anything on this matter, for many reasons, but I’ve held my tongue too long, for myself, as well as a few others who have emailed me privately. It’s sad and unfortunate this sort of thing has happened repeatedly in just the recent past. On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 07:03:36 +1100, "Tal" <beth…@hotmail.com> wrote: >just drop it will you!!
Well, Beth, the sad thing is for it to get dropped, those involved must drop the issue. If they don’t, then the thing continues to roll, much like a stone down a hill. The other thing to remember is that this is not a Yahoogroup or a personal messageboard. Temperment gets you nowhere on Usenet. >sheesh…….this issue is no longer relevant to anyone in this group – it’s >between jaqueline and i
No, actually you brought it to the NG, Beth, which is sad and unfortunate. Had you wished it to be kept private, between only you and Beth, the correspondence would have been done via email. >and for the record, i hadn’t received a thankyou when the inital message was >written – i wasn’t asking for a public thankyou, i was just saying a >thankyou ‘full stop’ would have been nice
You weren’t asking for a public thank you? You said: "I’m also not overly impressed wtih Jaqueline who pleaded with me though private email to take a look at her studies and then didn’t even thank me for all the effort I put in[.]" That says one, that you wanted a thank you, and two, that you had previously received email. Later, in another post, she said she emailed you — three times — yet you maintain you didn’t receive any of those emails. I’ve had similar things happen in the past. With Carnivore and Echelon working on overdrive, things are bound to happen, and this isn’t taking into consideration any of the normal burps and belches of the Internet. As I pointed out in another post, at least five percent of all email is lost in transit, at least according to a study within the past year. Another point is that no one here signed an agreement saying they would thank anyone for anything. In fact, a lot of folks post here with a question, several people answer, and you never again hear from the original person posting. Don’t take things so seriously — it isn’t good for the heart. Honest. >The rest of the email was expressing my concerns about my info not being >checked by anybody to see if it was accurate because i was worried about >giving out bad info.
Then you jumped on others, saying they didn’t do a peer review of your comments. No one here is obligated, first off, to do peer reviews. If someone saw something glaringly wrong, don’t you think someone would have said something? You’ve been here long enough to know that is the case. Saying, "I’m just annoyed because i was personally asked to give my comments on the sleep studyies in question, and i put a few hrs work in and nobody even said if i was possibly right or way off base and i don’t want to be giving out inaccurate info to someone about their health" implies you wanted others to make any corrections to your post (this is kind of done by not commenting, again, if there is nothing glaringly incorrect), or to praise your post. Based on the overall tone of your comments, I am swayed to lean to the latter of the two. Now, for the juicy part. You said, "My point is, i wont’ be going out of my way to provide my opinion on this kind of thing again because i’m not a professional and dont’ want to be giving out bad info – and with nobody making any comments whatsoever about my thoughts on the matter – i find myself in danger of being responsible for handing out bad info". This is your choice. Anyone can ask anyone anything. It is up to you to decide to answer. Should you choose to respond, or even undertake something, then it is on you. It is a personal decision. If you’re not thanked, so be it. I respond to many private emails each month, Beth, that are sent to the Awake In Philly email account. I also receive calls from various agencies in the Delaware Valley, asking for help and assistance. On top of that, I do work with many others, including reporters, in helping get clear and accurate information out to the public. Most of the stuff I do never gets a "thanks", at the very least. And that’s fine. I never started about a mission because someone may thank me or reimburse me for my time, labor, or expenses. And yes, I do have a lot of expenses with the work I do. >That SHOULD have all been clear in my email but you’ve all blown it way out >of proportion!
No, you’re posting, as well as your reply to Jacqueline (which came after she announced she was not returning to the NG), were, to say the least, abrasive and caustic. >THe matter is dealt with
Because you said so? >LET IT REST!!
"Physician, heal thyself." -dave
Response:
If I don’t understand, I can just be another victim of the teeth of the grouchy??? Joe <>< "Lee Babcock" <leebabc…@pathcom.com> wrote in message
news:3E5149AD.88081623@pathcom.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Joe Marino wrote: > > I am trying to understand, so please bear with me. This is over a thank you > > that was in private rather than in public? Are we to do nice things for > > other people for it’s own reward, or for the reward of a public kiss on the > > behind?!?! > Joe…. I was explaining what is customary, and why in NG’s. > However…… if you don’t understand……. > Regards > Lee in Toronto > ———–== Posted via Newsfeed.Com – Uncensored Usenet News ==———- > http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers
=—–
Response:
> Beth: > This is not your private group.
Exactly the point. This is not a moderated group so people can post what the want and they will react differently than you think they should or how you would expect them to. > I am trying to understand the culture of the group.
You are the culture of the group. Just be yourself. It also helps to be as understanding and courteous as you can. As you have no doubt noticed, not all people do that. That will only have a negative affect on the NG, but as you pointed out, that the nature of the beast! > This is not unreasonable. There have been several threads about > grouchy, snotty, belligerent answers being directed toward new posters.
I haven’t felt that way. But you should realize, because of the nature of NG’s in general, you can’t be thinned skinned, or you are likely to get yourself into trouble. IMHO, I’m thinking that’s what happened between Beth and Jacqueline, I think they both let things get under their skin a bit. And then everyone else jumps into the fray. It happens on NG’s from time to time, even among people with good intentions. Then there are the trolls …. > This appears to be a real case. If it is, then it should be either dealt > with or addressed.
Who is going to deal with it? You? Best to just drop it and go on. The more you meddle, the more people will be offended. > People can object, go along with it, kill file people > who are belligerent, etc. The grouchiness in the "alt" hierarchy are > inherent to the beast, but in some groups, it seems to be more blatant, > almost like it is accepted and accepted.
The nature of NG’s! Get used to it or get out! Gotta learn to ignore some people, even when the nature of their message is "challenging" in nature. (Yeah, right! What exactly am I doing right now??? <g>) > If that is the case here, then > some of us may want to go elsewhere or ignore those who are grouchy. So, in > short, it is a very relevant topic even if it has been settled.
It’s settled between Beth and Jacqueline, so it’s time to drop it and go on. I have found that with e-mail and especially NG’s, it is very easy to be misunderstood. Probably about 90% of communications is body language, which you lose here. Very difficult to determine the actual intent of the author without the body language. Better to assume the best of intentions unless the language expressly indicate otherwise. Robert — "If God had intended for us to see the sunrise, He would have scheduled it later in the day." (perform an exorcism for e-mail reply)
Response:
"h.sanders" wrote in message .net… > I’m bothered by the joy a couple folks here have taken in > Jacqueline’s leaving the group.
Hal…… if you see joy, then you are certainly looking for it i see no one that is happy that Jacqueline has decided to leave the group again (second time)
Response:
Joe Marino wrote: > I am trying to understand, so please bear with me. This is over a thank you > that was in private rather than in public? Are we to do nice things for > other people for it’s own reward, or for the reward of a public kiss on the > behind?!?!
Joe…. I was explaining what is customary, and why in NG’s. However…… if you don’t understand……. Regards Lee in Toronto ———–== Posted via Newsfeed.Com – Uncensored Usenet News ==———- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–
Response:
Beth: This is not your private group. I am trying to understand the culture of the group. This is not unreasonable. There have been several threads about grouchy, snotty, belligerent answers being directed toward new posters. This appears to be a real case. If it is, then it should be either dealt with or addressed. People can object, go along with it, kill file people who are belligerent, etc. The grouchiness in the "alt" hierarchy are inherent to the beast, but in some groups, it seems to be more blatant, almost like it is accepted and accepted. If that is the case here, then some of us may want to go elsewhere or ignore those who are grouchy. So, in short, it is a very relevant topic even if it has been settled. God bless, Joe <>< "Tal" <beth…@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b2rfav$1g247o$1@ID-148111.news.dfncis.de… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> just drop it will you!! > sheesh…….this issue is no longer relevant to anyone in this group – it’s > between jaqueline and i > and for the record, i hadn’t received a thankyou when the inital message was > written – i wasn’t asking for a public thankyou, i was just saying a > thankyou ‘full stop’ would have been nice > The rest of the email was expressing my concerns about my info not being > checked by anybody to see if it was accurate because i was worried about > giving out bad info. > That SHOULD have all been clear in my email but you’ve all blown it way out > of proportion! > THe matter is dealt with > LET IT REST!! > — > Beth in Australia > =================== > FAQ for alt.support.sleep-disorder can be found here > http://www.anchorweb.com.au/sleepdisorders > this site is a work in progress – feel free to submit info/articles
Response:
just drop it will you!! sheesh…….this issue is no longer relevant to anyone in this group – it’s between jaqueline and i and for the record, i hadn’t received a thankyou when the inital message was written – i wasn’t asking for a public thankyou, i was just saying a thankyou ‘full stop’ would have been nice The rest of the email was expressing my concerns about my info not being checked by anybody to see if it was accurate because i was worried about giving out bad info. That SHOULD have all been clear in my email but you’ve all blown it way out of proportion! THe matter is dealt with LET IT REST!! — Beth in Australia =================== FAQ for alt.support.sleep-disorder can be found here http://www.anchorweb.com.au/sleepdisorders this site is a work in progress – feel free to submit info/articles
Response:
I would like to take a moment to Thank everyone that has helped me. Lots of you folks have done so without even knowing it and certainly without asking any thing in return. I appreciate that very much. I just got an email from Tal/Beth telling me perhaps I should send my two emails thanking her again. I sent one of them, which was on the 12th. I also feel this was very childish to have asked me to do but such is life. I came to this newsgroup because I had a problem, OSA, which is one of the topics that is covered here. I wish I could stay but I do not have the time nor energy to be constantly criticized or challenged, which has happened to me more than one time by this one person. I have been praying about staying since the first episode but with this second one I really feel it is for my own best interest that I back off and not come back. My day to day life has enough stress in it without the added stress of this. For the most part I think you all are a great bunch of people and I appreciate all you have done for me and helped me with but for my own well being I am deleting my news program tonight and will not be reading another post until I feel my life can handle the stress of some folks. I have made a couple of friends on the group that if I have a question I think I could email privately and get a straight answer, or suggestion. For you all I am very thankful. I am not reading replies to this so there is no need in taking up the bandwidth to reply to it. If anyone should wish to contact me and remain in touch off the group, you may do so at jacqueline@ and then add mountain-breeze.com this mail works 99.9% of the time but I am sure that there are times it is down. For those of you that I have caused trouble, I am truly sorry. Please accept my apologies. For those that say I want to be begged to stay, that is very untrue. I would love to stay and learn from you all but with my parent’s illnesses and my own I just do not need the added stress. Please forgive me and if you believe in God and pray I would appreciate your prayers. Thank you and Goodbye, Jacqueline
Response:
> just got an email from Tal/Beth telling me perhaps I should send my > two emails thanking her again. I sent one of them, which was on the > 12th. I also feel this was very childish to have asked me to do but > such is life.
*sigh* for the record, there have been times in the past when someone mentioned an email i didn’t get (although this isn’t a common thing, only a few times i’m aware of in the past 5 or so years) and i asked them could they resend it. I figure if someone wrote me something they wanted me to read, if they sent it again, i could read it as the initial intention of sending it had been. I wasn’t aware there was anything wrong with that – i’d certainly be happy to resend any message someone told me they hadn’t received. — Beth in Australia =================== FAQ for alt.support.sleep-disorder can be found here http://www.anchorweb.com.au/sleepdisorders this site is a work in progress – feel free to submit info/articles
Response:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003 15:34:46 +1100, "Tal" <beth…@hotmail.com> wrote: >for the record, there have been times in the past when someone mentioned an >email i didn’t get (although this isn’t a common thing, only a few times i’m >aware of in the past 5 or so years)
Estimates last year said upwards of five percent of all email was never delivered. The number was higher, IIRC, but … -dave PGP Public Keys: http://scoop0901.net/PGP/PgPkEyS.htm Send me encrypted email for security! Support the Department of Homeland Defense and the Office of Total Information Awareness! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | Dave Jackson * http://www.scoop0901.net/ * Phila., PA. | | ~~eFax: 253-423-7208~~ * mailto:scoop0…@scoop0901.net | | "People seem not to see that their opinion of the world | | is also a confession of character." – Ralph Waldo Emerson | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -"Tal" > wrote in message … >> I also feel this was very childish to have asked me to do but > > such is life. > *sigh* > for the record, there have been times in the past when someone mentioned an > email i didn’t get (although this isn’t a common thing, only a few times i’m > aware of in the past 5 or so years) and i asked them could they resend it. > I figure if someone wrote me something they wanted me to read, if they sent > it again, i could read it as the initial intention of sending it had been. > I wasn’t aware there was anything wrong with that – i’d certainly be happy > to resend any message someone told me they hadn’t received.
Beth, YOUR post was very extensive, and i think that basic rules of common courtesy demand that the "thank you" be posted right here on the newsgroup where the entire conversation started i’m NOT impressed with the dig that Jacqueline needed to get in….. i think that’s childish!……. well, #*(@#$&*#@$ Jacqueline, i think it was rude, arrogant, ignorant, discourteous, unfeeling, disrespectful to NOT post a thank you ON THE NEWSGROUP to Beth for her detailed analysis of the sleep study Beth……thanks for posting that…. it gave me a new look at how sleep studies are interpreted…… i only saw the summary page in the Dr office Hal……. take that chip off your shoulder, and quit looking for an argument where none exists…… your sole purpose here seems to be to inflame rubs or to start a fire where none exists! (and yes, you’ll have lots of comments about my post here…….. don’t worry…. i ignore you now) there……that’s how i feel about this…… facts straight up and in your face if you don’t like it kate
Response:
Ok everyone, Jaqueline and I have put all this stuff (and we’re both to blame) behind us and are starting fresh…… I hope everyone else can do that too. I wasn’t going to post anything here about it because I guess it’s between her and I now – but i think there’s a need to because people are getting aggrivated about the whole thing, and I admit that I am in part to blame for that. So……please…… let’s drop the whole Tal/Jaqueline issue…..k? — Beth in Australia =================== FAQ for alt.support.sleep-disorder can be found here http://www.anchorweb.com.au/sleepdisorders this site is a work in progress – feel free to submit info/articles
Response:
"Tiger Lily" <nob…@example.com> wrote in message
news:V884a.82070$Q_1.1582996@news2.telusplanet.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Tal" > wrote in message … > >> I also feel this was very childish to have asked me to do but > > > such is life. > > *sigh* > > for the record, there have been times in the past when someone mentioned > an > > email i didn’t get (although this isn’t a common thing, only a few times > i’m > > aware of in the past 5 or so years) and i asked them could they resend it. > > I figure if someone wrote me something they wanted me to read, if they > sent > > it again, i could read it as the initial intention of sending it had been. > > I wasn’t aware there was anything wrong with that – i’d certainly be happy > > to resend any message someone told me they hadn’t received. > Beth, YOUR post was very extensive, and i think that basic rules of common > courtesy demand that the "thank you" be posted right here on the newsgroup > where the entire conversation started > i’m NOT impressed with the dig that Jacqueline needed to get in….. i think > that’s childish!……. well, #*(@#$&*#@$ Jacqueline, i think it was rude, > arrogant, ignorant, discourteous, unfeeling, disrespectful to NOT post a > thank you ON THE NEWSGROUP to Beth for her detailed analysis of the sleep > study > Beth……thanks for posting that…. it gave me a new look at how sleep > studies are interpreted…… i only saw the summary page in the Dr office > Hal……. take that chip off your shoulder, and quit looking for an > argument where none exists…… your sole purpose here seems to be to > inflame rubs or to start a fire where none exists! (and yes, you’ll have > lots of comments about my post here…….. don’t worry…. i ignore you > now) > there……that’s how i feel about this…… facts straight up and in your > face if you don’t like it > kate
—————————————————– Kate: You’ll only have this comment from me. Your remarks about Jacqueline, especially now that she’s not here, are completely uncalled for. If one only helps another in this newsgroup for the public strokng one gets instead of the sincere desire to help someone, there is not much value in that help. Jacqueline had thanked Beth at least twice in email. A public stroking wasn’t necessary. I don’t believe Jacqueline was "arrogant, ignorant, dscourteous, unfeeling or disrespectful."There you go, "the facts straight up and in your face." Several of you have driven Jacqueline out of the NG, so the handful of you can go back to your electronic playpen and continue your public stroking and mutual admiration society. Hal S.
Response:
Is this group to help people or to stroke the egos of people who have made it their personal clique? Maybe people should consider whether what they are going to write is going to be edifying or caring before hitting send. Part of a support group is that it is a place where people feel safe to share what is going on for them without being attacked or unfairly criticized. If someone writes something stupid, correct them gently rather than ripping them. People are not going to participate in any real way if people are mean to them. Why would you want to stay in this group to offer help to people, then simply rip them when they ask a question or make a comment that you don’t like? What are you really giving back? Just my 2 cents… and you can keep the change.
Response:
Glad to hear it. ) — Frankie -> -> -> (Remove MYSPLEEN to reply ) "Tal" <beth…@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b2r3od$1bbfqv$1@ID-148111.news.dfncis.de… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Ok everyone, Jaqueline and I have put all this stuff (and we’re both to > blame) behind us and are starting fresh…… > I hope everyone else can do that too. > I wasn’t going to post anything here about it because I guess it’s between > her and I now – but i think there’s a need to because people are getting > aggrivated about the whole thing, and I admit that I am in part to blame for > that. > So……please…… let’s drop the whole Tal/Jaqueline issue…..k? > — > Beth in Australia > =================== > FAQ for alt.support.sleep-disorder can be found here > http://www.anchorweb.com.au/sleepdisorders > this site is a work in progress – feel free to submit info/articles
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -"h.sanders" wrote: > "Tiger Lily" <nob…@example.com> wrote in message > news:V884a.82070$Q_1.1582996@news2.telusplanet.net… > > "Tal" > wrote in message … > > >> I also feel this was very childish to have asked me to do but > > > > such is life. > > > *sigh* > > > for the record, there have been times in the past when someone mentioned > > an > > > email i didn’t get (although this isn’t a common thing, only a few times > > i’m > > > aware of in the past 5 or so years) and i asked them could they resend > it. > > > I figure if someone wrote me something they wanted me to read, if they > > sent > > > it again, i could read it as the initial intention of sending it had > been. > > > I wasn’t aware there was anything wrong with that – i’d certainly be > happy > > > to resend any message someone told me they hadn’t received. > > Beth, YOUR post was very extensive, and i think that basic rules of common > > courtesy demand that the "thank you" be posted right here on the newsgroup > > where the entire conversation started > > i’m NOT impressed with the dig that Jacqueline needed to get in….. i > think > > that’s childish!……. well, #*(@#$&*#@$ Jacqueline, i think it was rude, > > arrogant, ignorant, discourteous, unfeeling, disrespectful to NOT post a > > thank you ON THE NEWSGROUP to Beth for her detailed analysis of the sleep > > study > > Beth……thanks for posting that…. it gave me a new look at how sleep > > studies are interpreted…… i only saw the summary page in the Dr office > > Hal……. take that chip off your shoulder, and quit looking for an > > argument where none exists…… your sole purpose here seems to be to > > inflame rubs or to start a fire where none exists! (and yes, you’ll have > > lots of comments about my post here…….. don’t worry…. i ignore you > > now) > > there……that’s how i feel about this…… facts straight up and in > your > > face if you don’t like it > > kate > —————————————————– > Kate: You’ll only have this comment from me. Your remarks about Jacqueline, > especially now that she’s not here, are completely uncalled for. If one > only helps another in this newsgroup for the public strokng one gets instead > of the sincere desire to help someone, there is not much value in that help. > Jacqueline had thanked Beth at least twice in email. A public stroking > wasn’t necessary. I don’t believe Jacqueline was "arrogant, ignorant, > dscourteous, unfeeling or disrespectful."There you go, "the facts straight > up and in your face." Several of you have driven Jacqueline out of the NG, > so the handful of you can go back to your electronic playpen and continue > your public stroking and mutual admiration society. > Hal S.
Hal….. all the terminologies aside, NG’s are there for the benefit of the group. If something is posted on the NG, and someone wants to give thanks, then it should be done in the group! After all, the whole group will benefit. However, if someone wants to expand on their thank you, then an additional personal email would be very acceptable but should be done as well as the public one. Regards Lee in Toronto ———–== Posted via Newsfeed.Com – Uncensored Usenet News ==———- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Tal wrote: > Ok everyone, Jaqueline and I have put all this stuff (and we’re both to > blame) behind us and are starting fresh…… > I hope everyone else can do that too. > I wasn’t going to post anything here about it because I guess it’s between > her and I now – but i think there’s a need to because people are getting > aggrivated about the whole thing, and I admit that I am in part to blame for > that. > So……please…… let’s drop the whole Tal/Jaqueline issue…..k? > — > Beth in Australia
Bravo to both of you. Regards Lee in Toronto ———–== Posted via Newsfeed.Com – Uncensored Usenet News ==———- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–
Response:
I am trying to understand, so please bear with me. This is over a thank you that was in private rather than in public? Are we to do nice things for other people for it’s own reward, or for the reward of a public kiss on the behind?!?! "Lee Babcock" <leebabc…@pathcom.com> wrote in message
news:3E513445.FE8B815@pathcom.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "h.sanders" wrote: > > "Tiger Lily" <nob…@example.com> wrote in message > > news:V884a.82070$Q_1.1582996@news2.telusplanet.net… > > > "Tal" > wrote in message … > > > >> I also feel this was very childish to have asked me to do but > > > > > such is life. > > > > *sigh* > > > > for the record, there have been times in the past when someone mentioned > > > an > > > > email i didn’t get (although this isn’t a common thing, only a few times > > > i’m > > > > aware of in the past 5 or so years) and i asked them could they resend > > it. > > > > I figure if someone wrote me something they wanted me to read, if they > > > sent > > > > it again, i could read it as the initial intention of sending it had > > been. > > > > I wasn’t aware there was anything wrong with that – i’d certainly be > > happy > > > > to resend any message someone told me they hadn’t received. > > > Beth, YOUR post was very extensive, and i think that basic rules of common > > > courtesy demand that the "thank you" be posted right here on the newsgroup > > > where the entire conversation started > > > i’m NOT impressed with the dig that Jacqueline needed to get in….. i > > think > > > that’s childish!……. well, #*(@#$&*#@$ Jacqueline, i think it was rude, > > > arrogant, ignorant, discourteous, unfeeling, disrespectful to NOT post a > > > thank you ON THE NEWSGROUP to Beth for her detailed analysis of the sleep > > > study > > > Beth……thanks for posting that…. it gave me a new look at how sleep > > > studies are interpreted…… i only saw the summary page in the Dr office > > > Hal……. take that chip off your shoulder, and quit looking for an > > > argument where none exists…… your sole purpose here seems to be to > > > inflame rubs or to start a fire where none exists! (and yes, you’ll have > > > lots of comments about my post here…….. don’t worry…. i ignore you > > > now) > > > there……that’s how i feel about this…… facts straight up and in > > your > > > face if you don’t like it > > > kate > > —————————————————– > > Kate: You’ll only have this comment from me. Your remarks about Jacqueline, > > especially now that she’s not here, are completely uncalled for. If one > > only helps another in this newsgroup for the public strokng one gets instead > > of the sincere desire to help someone, there is not much value in that help. > > Jacqueline had thanked Beth at least twice in email. A public stroking > > wasn’t necessary. I don’t believe Jacqueline was "arrogant, ignorant, > > dscourteous, unfeeling or disrespectful."There you go, "the facts straight > > up and in your face." Several of you have driven Jacqueline out of the NG, > > so the handful of you can go back to your electronic playpen and continue > > your public stroking and mutual admiration society. > > Hal S. > Hal….. all the terminologies aside, NG’s are there for the benefit of > the group. If something is posted on the NG, and someone wants to give > thanks, then it should be done in the group! > After all, the whole group will benefit. > However, if someone wants to expand on their thank you, then an > additional personal email would be very acceptable but should be done > as well as the public one. > Regards > Lee in Toronto > ———–== Posted via Newsfeed.Com – Uncensored Usenet News ==———- > http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers
=—–
Response:
"Joe Marino" <jmarino…@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:4za4a.153289$be.132890@rwcrnsc53… > I am trying to understand, so please bear with me. This is over a thank you > that was in private rather than in public? Are we to do nice things for > other people for it’s own reward, or for the reward of a public kiss on the > behind?!?!
—————————————————————— You got it, Joe. That’s what I was trying to say. Apparently two or three private emails from Jacqueline weren’t a sufficient "thankyou." A public stroking appears to be required also by some folks. I disagree that a "thankyou" is necessary to the whole group. I’m bothered by the joy a couple folks here have taken in Jacqueline’s leaving the group. Hal S. ————————————————————————— – ————————————– > – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Lee Babcock" <leebabc…@pathcom.com> wrote in message > news:3E513445.FE8B815@pathcom.com… > > "h.sanders" wrote: > > > "Tiger Lily" <nob…@example.com> wrote in message > > > news:V884a.82070$Q_1.1582996@news2.telusplanet.net… > > > > "Tal" > wrote in message … > > > > >> I also feel this was very childish to have asked me to do but > > > > > > such is life. > > > > > *sigh* > > > > > for the record, there have been times in the past when someone > mentioned > > > > an > > > > > email i didn’t get (although this isn’t a common thing, only a few > times > > > > i’m > > > > > aware of in the past 5 or so years) and i asked them could they > resend > > > it. > > > > > I figure if someone wrote me something they wanted me to read, if > they > > > > sent > > > > > it again, i could read it as the initial intention of sending it had > > > been. > > > > > I wasn’t aware there was anything wrong with that – i’d certainly be > > > happy > > > > > to resend any message someone told me they hadn’t received. > > > > Beth, YOUR post was very extensive, and i think that basic rules of > common > > > > courtesy demand that the "thank you" be posted right here on the > newsgroup > > > > where the entire conversation started > > > > i’m NOT impressed with the dig that Jacqueline needed to get in….. i > > > think > > > > that’s childish!……. well, #*(@#$&*#@$ Jacqueline, i think it was > rude, > > > > arrogant, ignorant, discourteous, unfeeling, disrespectful to NOT post > a > > > > thank you ON THE NEWSGROUP to Beth for her detailed analysis of the > sleep > > > > study > > > > Beth……thanks for posting that…. it gave me a new look at how > sleep > > > > studies are interpreted…… i only saw the summary page in the Dr > office > > > > Hal……. take that chip off your shoulder, and quit looking for an > > > > argument where none exists…… your sole purpose here seems to be to > > > > inflame rubs or to start a fire where none exists! (and yes, you’ll > have > > > > lots of comments about my post here…….. don’t worry…. i ignore > you > > > > now) > > > > there……that’s how i feel about this…… facts straight up and in > > > your > > > > face if you don’t like it > > > > kate > > > —————————————————– > > > Kate: You’ll only have this comment from me. Your remarks about > Jacqueline, > > > especially now that she’s not here, are completely uncalled for. If one > > > only helps another in this newsgroup for the public strokng one gets > instead > > > of the sincere desire to help someone, there is not much value in that > help. > > > Jacqueline had thanked Beth at least twice in email. A public stroking > > > wasn’t necessary. I don’t believe Jacqueline was "arrogant, ignorant, > > > dscourteous, unfeeling or disrespectful."There you go, "the facts > straight > > > up and in your face." Several of you have driven Jacqueline out of the > NG, > > > so the handful of you can go back to your electronic playpen and > continue > > > your public stroking and mutual admiration society. > > > Hal S. > > Hal….. all the terminologies aside, NG’s are there for the benefit of > > the group. If something is posted on the NG, and someone wants to give > > thanks, then it should be done in the group! > > After all, the whole group will benefit. > > However, if someone wants to expand on their thank you, then an > > additional personal email would be very acceptable but should be done > > as well as the public one. > > Regards > > Lee in Toronto > > ———–== Posted via Newsfeed.Com – Uncensored Usenet News > ==———- > > http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > > —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers > =—–
