A question for the group

[Hugh Watkins]

Isn't it about time you guys realised that this is a very stupid choice
of subject?

see for example http://www.jewishgen.org/JewishGen/DiscussionGroup.htm :-

SUBJECT LINE:

Provide a clear and descriptive Subject line.
Think of the message subject line as a "headline" capturing the central
point of the message you are sending.

For example, you are asking a question about the 1910 Federal Census, it
makes no sense to write a general subject line such as: "Need census
information"; you need to be much more specific and can still keep it
short by saying "Need 1910 Census Info", for example.

SIGNATURE:

Sign your message with your full real name, and city/country
location.


food for thought
and how to be effective

Hugh W


--

a wonderful artist in Denmark
http://www.ingerlisekristoffersen.dk/

Beta blogger
http://snaps4.blogspot.com/ photographs and walks

old blogger GENEALOGE
http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG

[R00tsMagic]

Hugh Watkins wrote:

food for thought
and how to be effective

Yeah, be effective like Phew Clotkins, who lives in a council flat and
gets his thrills from beating up on Usenet newbies. fillern off, you old gomer.

[Paul Blair]

R00tsMagic wrote:

Hugh Watkins wrote:
food for thought
and how to be effective

Yeah, be effective like Phew Clotkins, who lives in a council flat and
gets his thrills from beating up on Usenet newbies. fillern off, you old
gomer.

Complaints to: [email protected]
Trace: newsfe08.phx 1169157144 70.180.217.146 (Thu, 18 Jan 2007 14:52:24
MST)

Paul

[Hugh Watkins]

Paul Blair wrote:

R00tsMagic wrote:

Hugh Watkins wrote:

food for thought
and how to be effective


Yeah, be effective like Phew Clotkins, who lives in a council flat and
gets his thrills from beating up on Usenet newbies. fillern off, you old
gomer.




Complaints to: [email protected]
Trace: newsfe08.phx 1169157144 70.180.217.146 (Thu, 18 Jan 2007 14:52:24
MST)

Paul

don't worry Paul my waistcoat is bullet and fire proof

he is no newbie he is on his 4th or 5th sock puppet
but his style reveals who he is

I was going to ignore him this time round

cheers

Hugh W
--

a wonderful artist in Denmark
http://www.ingerlisekristoffersen.dk/

Beta blogger
http://snaps4.blogspot.com/ photographs and walks

old blogger GENEALOGE
http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG

[Rebel Lion]

R00tsMagic wrote:

Hugh Watkins wrote:
food for thought
and how to be effective

Yeah, be effective like Phew Clotkins, who lives in a council flat and
gets his thrills from beating up on Usenet newbies. fillern off, you old
gomer.

This from the same idiot he supposedly reported someone else for using
this language to him. What a wanker.

[R00tsMagic]

Rebel Lion wrote:

R00tsMagic wrote:

Hugh Watkins wrote:
food for thought and how to be effective
Yeah, be effective like Phew Clotkins, who lives in a council flat
and gets his thrills from beating up on Usenet newbies. fillern off,
you old gomer.


This from the same idiot he supposedly reported someone else for
using this language to him. What a wanker.

They left him with an account, so I'll give him his own "medicine" from
now on. It just appalls me that this pensioner living on other people's
taxes has the gall to come here and abuse anyone and everyone at whim.

And you're not much better. "Rebel Lion"? No, more like pusillanimous
mouse, or sycophantic snake.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 21:38:18 +0000, Hugh Watkins
<[email protected]> wrote:

Isn't it about time you guys realised that this is a very stupid choice
of subject?

That was my subject line so I'll respond.

If I have a somewhat complex question and I would like interested
members of the group to respond, what better subject than, "A question
for the group"?

You're still a pompous ass and I appreciate the opportunity to
continue telling you so.

Hugh

[Hugh Watkins]

J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 21:38:18 +0000, Hugh Watkins
[email protected]> wrote:


Isn't it about time you guys realised that this is a very stupid choice
of subject?


That was my subject line so I'll respond.

If I have a somewhat complex question and I would like interested
members of the group to respond, what better subject than, "A question
for the group"?

You're still a pompous ass and I appreciate the opportunity to
continue telling you so.

but it is me who gets thank you emails from strangers for all the look
ups I do

are you Jades uncle?

Hugh W


--

a wonderful artist in Denmark
http://www.ingerlisekristoffersen.dk/

Beta blogger
http://snaps4.blogspot.com/ photographs and walks

old blogger GENEALOGE
http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG

[R00tsMagic]

Hugh Watkins wrote:

but it is me who gets thank you emails from strangers for all the look
ups I do

Get a life, Grandpa Gomer.
What is a Gomer, I hear you ask?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOMER

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:38:45 +0000, Hugh Watkins
<[email protected]> wrote:

J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 21:38:18 +0000, Hugh Watkins
[email protected]> wrote:


Isn't it about time you guys realised that this is a very stupid choice
of subject?


That was my subject line so I'll respond.

If I have a somewhat complex question and I would like interested
members of the group to respond, what better subject than, "A question
for the group"?

You're still a pompous ass and I appreciate the opportunity to
continue telling you so.

but it is me who gets thank you emails from strangers for all the look
ups I do

That's fine and is to be commended - and I do so. But don't get the
smug feeling that you alone get thank you e-mails and calls.

To come on this forum and think it is your appointed lot to instruct
others on how to conduct genealogy and how to ask questions in order
to learn is not so well received.

When a person is obviously wrong your lectures might be appropriate -
when it's your opinion versus another's opinion, you'll probably lose.

You seem to have an innate need to impress others with your expertise
- I may not be one but several here are more than your peers.

I hope your next attempt will not be an effort to point out where I go
off-topic on occasion. Given the opportunity I think most of us would
like to be friends and not just students of genealogy.

Hugh

[Robert M. Riches Jr.]

On 2007-01-19, J. Hugh Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote:

That was my subject line so I'll respond.

If I have a somewhat complex question and I would like interested
members of the group to respond, what better subject than, "A question
for the group"?

That logic and subject line would be good if having 'a
question for the group' were a rare thing. Reality is that
most original postings (and some follow-ups) could all be
given that subject line. If most of the threads in the
group had the same subject line, the subject line would be
useless. A subject line somehow related to the _content_ of
the question would be more useful.

snip

I'll leave the foul language and name calling to other
posters.

--
Robert Riches
[email protected]
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 17:57:59 GMT, "Robert M. Riches Jr."
<[email protected]> wrote:

On 2007-01-19, J. Hugh Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote:

That was my subject line so I'll respond.

If I have a somewhat complex question and I would like interested
members of the group to respond, what better subject than, "A question
for the group"?

That logic and subject line would be good if having 'a
question for the group' were a rare thing.

First it takes up very little space.
Second it describes the entire first post without having a 20 line
subject.
Third it is comparatively rare on this forum
Fourth, maybe I should have added "about methods" - which tells little
more than what I said.
Fifth, maybe you could suggest a header I should have used.

Reality is that
most original postings (and some follow-ups) could all be
given that subject line.

Yes, I notice that Watkins gave the same heading to this thread when
his post was not even a question at all. Perhaps your objection is to
his post with a misleading Subject Header, not mine.

If most of the threads in the
group had the same subject line, the subject line would be
useless.

Why should they be? Is that a real danger, you think?

A subject line somehow related to the _content_ of
the question would be more useful.

I'll leave the foul language and name calling to other
posters.

Maybe you can help me then - what is another name for a pompous ass?
Would pompous donkey have been a balm to your sensitive ears?

Hugh