This is a GREAT reason to gateway messages. The poster would need a better reason to have the message removed from the list archives I would think. Thus the info remains available to researchers! Rel@ively, Patrice At 7/22/2006 12:49 PM, lklein@mindspring.com wrote: >Tribehunter@aol.com wrote: >>I'd have to disagree with this to a point. I had a post that went on for >>3 lines, <snip> > >Yeah, I think if practically the entire message has been used as the >subject line, I would reduce the subject line a little. That does >help catch the eye, plus helps keep that and subsequent responses >from falling off the edge of our screens. ;-) > > >Someone mentioned deleting posts. As for contacting the poster, I >hope the changes in the boards will do something to help us with >that. I've had one poster request 50+ posts of hers to be deleted >at a time, and she's done this several times (170 - 200 deletions) >in the past couple of weeks. I suspect she thinks her answers are >either taking up too much space or they're outdated. I've tried >writing to her, but she has so far refused to answer my several >e-mails. I know I have to respect her request and have deleted her >posts, but it's a shame that others on the boards will suffer >because they won't have a chance to see the posts she's had removed. >It would be nice if we had a way to put an objection on hold, pending >a response from the objector, or if an auto-generated response could >go out whenever someone requests a post be deleted. Something like >"As the author of the post, your request to have your own post >deleted will of course be honored, but . . . " followed with an >explanation of why they might like to reconsider. > >Lynne