Re: Digest Number 203
[email protected]
I'm receiving the digest version of this list and I have a suggestion. It
would be much easier if the digest could only be lengthy enough to fill up an
e-mail and not have to be sent in an attachment. I would rather get two or
more e-mails a day than have to fiddle around with downloading, saving and
later opening an attached file--in fact, usually I just delete them right
away due to lack of time.
Does anyone agree and, if so, where do I go with this suggestion?
Susan
would be much easier if the digest could only be lengthy enough to fill up an
e-mail and not have to be sent in an attachment. I would rather get two or
more e-mails a day than have to fiddle around with downloading, saving and
later opening an attached file--in fact, usually I just delete them right
away due to lack of time.
Does anyone agree and, if so, where do I go with this suggestion?
Susan
Amy Aybar
<I would rather get two or more e-mails a day than have to fiddle around >
Is it because they are so big that they are attachments or are they
attachments regardless? One suggestion is that people take the time to only
put small snippets into a reply rather than the whole e-mail they are
replying to. I find it much easier to read that way then slogging through
the whole thing everytime.
Amy
Mom to Carlos (6) and Sasha (4)
Is it because they are so big that they are attachments or are they
attachments regardless? One suggestion is that people take the time to only
put small snippets into a reply rather than the whole e-mail they are
replying to. I find it much easier to read that way then slogging through
the whole thing everytime.
Amy
Mom to Carlos (6) and Sasha (4)