In article <lrGQqJAhQLN0Iwud at tarrcity.demon.co.uk>,
Gab <gab_n99 at tarrcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <611afo$4eke at pegasus.unm.edu>, kristen marie davenport
><kristend at unm.edu> writes
><snip>
>>Most people are quite new to this whole Usenet thing (surely you were new
>>to this only a few years ago) and some people don't know the rules.
>Then they're more likely to discover what the rules are if breaches in
>netiquette are publically noted in the newsgroup rather than by email to
>the miscreant. I'm learning the rules of the Net by reading newsgroups
>and learning from other people's mistakes *aswell* as my own.
>>Rather
>>than attacking them viciously, it would be much more productive to
>>politely let them know they did something annoying. Why spread anger?
>>Life is full of hassles. Save your anger for the big ones.
I missed this the first time round, I do tend to abridge
articles whilst reading them and sometimes miss parts,
but:-
I _frequently_ send people email when they have breached
nettiquette, which doesn't appear on the net, so don't
always assume that people make a fus in public, it's only
the _really_ stupdi ones which irritate me enough to make
my feelings public.
Sod it, I've just written in another article that I
wasn't going to respond to any more, and here I am doing
just that.
Alan
