pg question

"ipinchibite" wrote in message
oups.com...
Then tell me why nobody else has gave me any crap about it? I think
thats the real ettiquette there. Not to judge someone who just started
at this whole thing, just looking to get good advice and make new
friends while going through one of the biggest changes in life. In my
oppinion, I think I have been doing just fine with how I 'quote' and
'respond' to people on this site, and apparently, have got my point
across to more than enough people. Don'tcha think?

I'm not giving you crap yet-I'm making a suggestion that'll help you
communicate with more than just a few of us. It's considered standard
etiquette to make the effort to fit into a group and learn some of the group
conventions-in usenet, that means referencing what you're replying to
because very few people are going to take the time to go back through an
*entire thread* that could be a few hundred posts long to try to decipher
who you're responding to.

Jess

ipinchibite wrote:

What are you talking about? And who asked you anyways? For your
information, I have Outlook Express, I couldn't check my work email
without it. And I think I have been doing just fine with how I am
working Google Groups. I get my point across, ask my questions, and get
them answered. Isn't that what counts?

Usually "new" people are given some leeway, but this will be brought
up eventually. Propagation is pretty good these days, but it's still
not uncommon to get an answer to a post before the one that proceeded
it, so if something isn't properly quoted and attributed, the readers
may not know what you're talking about. I tend to mentally skip over
posts with no quotes or attributes because I don't want to bother
backing up a post to see what they're talking about. It's not a
completely conscious thing any more, unless something catches my eye I
barely skim it and move on.

Jess' suggestion wasn't rude or uncommon, and she was simply trying to
point out the normal way of doing things. Certainly nothing to get
all bent out of shape about.

Michelle
Flutist

Michelle J. Haines wrote:
Usually "new" people are given some leeway, but this will be brought
up eventually. Propagation is pretty good these days, but it's still
not uncommon to get an answer to a post before the one that proceeded
it, so if something isn't properly quoted and attributed, the readers
may not know what you're talking about. I tend to mentally skip over
posts with no quotes or attributes because I don't want to bother
backing up a post to see what they're talking about. It's not a
completely conscious thing any more, unless something catches my eye I
barely skim it and move on.

Jess' suggestion wasn't rude or uncommon, and she was simply trying to
point out the normal way of doing things. Certainly nothing to get
all bent out of shape about.

Michelle
Flutist




Makes sence, because I think I know what you're talking about now. I
didn't 'quote' anybody on one of my posts up there, because... I didnt
quote anybody. I wasn't answering to someone's post, or refering to
something someone said priror. I was simply starting a new post for
everybody to take part in. That could be what threw you guys off,
because I have been good at 'quoting' to everybody... such as, making
their conversation appear above mine. I knew how to do that. So, now
you'll all know from now on, that if there is no quote above what I'm
posting, I'm probably not quoting, and just simply starting a new
topic, or conversation.

Ash

"ipinchibite" wrote in message
oups.com...
So, now
you'll all know from now on, that if there is no quote above what I'm
posting, I'm probably not quoting, and just simply starting a new
topic, or conversation.

Then why not just start a new thread?

Jess

I did start a new thread once, but I find it easier just to keep
replying in the same thread. I get confused on how to start a new one,
and keep it going. I suck at this being new stuff... but thanks for the
warm welcome =)

Ash



Michelle J. Haines wrote:
OK, cool. One more suggestion, try not to start a thread by
replying to another thread but giving it a new topic name. For those
of us with threaded newsreaders, they will still stack in a thread, so
it's -usually- best to just go ahead and start it all over. (I think
I noticed you doing that once.)

Anyway, welcome aboard. Sometimes it's a ride.

Michelle
Flutist