As you have chosen to air your complaints on the list, I will also. I have emailed you several times, telling you what happened, what my problem was and what I did to solve it. My emails, the last one earlier this morning, were friendly and filled with the humor about the situation and I cannot imagine why, at this point in the game, you feel compelled to send this email to everyone. I, and I'm sure I speak for everyone, wish you would just let it drop.....what is the point? Haven't there been enough emails, in more ways than one, generated? If you wish to complain further, please do so to my own email address, where you will not bother others and I can exercise my delete key! S. > To: PACHESTE-L@rootsweb.com <PACHESTE-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, July 20, 2000 2:29 AM Subject: Re: [PACHESTE] Multiple messages >It looks like I'm supposed to be guilty of having >started something, too; Sandra wrote to me and >took me on for criticizing her. I wrote back >that we were talking about her but were not >talking critically about her; in fact, I didn't >see a single posting that was critical of Sandy, >and I think I read them all, first because I was >concerned, then because I was so amused. >Everyone thought that something was going on that >she had no control over and very likely didn't >even know about. I tried to clarify to her that >I had found it funny, and appreciated the day's >amusement, which was in fact the only amusement >I've had all day. I know I"m not the only one - a >number of people were counting those posts on the >list well after we fully knew what was going on - >the only reason was we found it funny. Most of us >were doing all of this laughing throughout the >early afternoon, when everyone who DID have >anything at all else to occupy their minds today >was at work, or otherwise off doing it. I also >sympathized with her computer catching a cold - >she related to me how she took it out in the >pouring rain to get it fixed, whether before or >after the problem, I'm not clear. It seems when >she defragmented or whatever her computer, it got >the idea she had 9000 sent mails, and went crazy? >(I'll never defragment my computer again...) > >Also, I think that probably alot of people wrote >to Sandy, as I initially did, to inform her of a >possible problem, before they got down their >mailbox and learned that people already did that >and Sandy had already responded. That kind of >thing was simply innocent. I know I wrote to her >on the assumption that she did not know about >whatever her computer was doing. I think I >informed her about that virus that mimics >Rootsweb postings, and everything. I certainly >was never insulting. I think I did see taht >there was discussion about the problem on the >list, but the subject lines didn't say "Hey, >Sandy, I think there's a problem" or "Sandy's >response to the list", I thought it was just >people discussing the problem. Unfortunately, >I've never before seen people actually do the >degree of handling a situation well and >constructively that I did this afternoon on this >list. > >I have seen people attacked when their computers >were sending out viruses; a woman recently came >unstuck on the Cecil County list because she >thought Rootsweb was sending her viruses. >Actually it was the virus that pretends to be >rootsweb that I initially thought must have >attacked Sandy's computer. Unfortunately, instead >of explaining the situation, the listowner >responded on the list that rootsweb doesn't send >viruses and referred one to a url at rootsweb on >which one had to in turn search for the page that >explains the virus, and that woman simply >exploded. Then the listowner exploded back. I >was ANSWERING all these posts a day behind the >times, trying to explain to this woman what >probably actually was going on, and what probably >was NOT going on, which was she thought someone >was deliberately sending viruses to the members >of that list, and at this point, I both gave up, >and stopped following it. > >Most of us know that people whose computers send >viruses are victims and usually unwitting ones. >I guess that atleast the person who wanted to >know what was Sandy's problem wrote to her >privately. I guess that it is very easy when one >finds oneself the focus of public attention over >something embarrassing to think one is being >criticized, particularly since that seems to be >so likely to happen. But I don't think a single >one of us meant it that way or in fact acted that >way. > >I know I did, as Sandy bitterly pointed out to >me, refer to her as "her" alot - but looking back >on it, I really can't think what else I would >have called her. The focus was quite properly on >what we all thought was the problem Sandy was >having - and not on Sandy. > >Yours, >Dora Smith > >--- Rhonda <lindclan@lisco.com> wrote: >> I think that I started something I'm sorry I >> just wanted to let some one no >> that there was a problem I'm sorry if it >> affened anyone >> >> Rhonda >> -----Original Message----- >> From: fianna@fast.net <fianna@fast.net> >> To: PACHESTE-L@rootsweb.com >> <PACHESTE-L@rootsweb.com> >> Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 5:47 PM >> Subject: Re: [PACHESTE] Multiple messages >> >> >> >Thank you, Sandra, for sending the information >> I was looking for on Sill >> and >> >Callahan. >> >Who could think the multiples were your doing? >> Surely no one imagined you >> sat >> >there and pressed "send" twenty times! >> > >> >Always grateful for all your contributions to >> the list, >> >Karen >> > >> > >> >Sandra Ferguson wrote: >> > >> >> Thanks a lot, Yvonne...You'll never know >> how much I appreciate your >> >> support for a PURELY MECHANICAL problem >> beyond my control...but, it >> >> certainly is interesting to see how nice >> people are when you're helping >> >> them, and unpleasant some can be when things >> go awry! Food for thought! >> >> My favorite email said ''WHAT IS YOUR >> PROBLEM!!!!!!!!!", as if I >> knew! >> >> If I had known I'd have done something about >> it....duh! >> >> >> >> Sandra >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: MarkleVon@aol.com <MarkleVon@aol.com> >> >> To: PACHESTE-L@rootsweb.com >> <PACHESTE-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 3:49 PM >> >> Subject: [PACHESTE] Multiple messages >> >> >> >> >Listers, Please don't come down on poor >> Sandy. There obviously is a >> problem >> >> >beyond her control. She has been a valued >> contributor to this list. It >> >> could >> >> >happen to any one of us. Let's give her >> some support. Yvonne >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >==== PACHESTE Mailing List ==== >> >> >Stop by our associated website for Chester >> County Genealogy at >> >> >> >http://www.rootsweb.com/~pacheste/chester.htm >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> ==== PACHESTE Mailing List ==== >> >> Stop by our associated website for Chester >> County Genealogy at >> >> >> http://www.rootsweb.com/~pacheste/chester.htm >> > >> > >> >==== PACHESTE Mailing List ==== >> >Visit the US GenWeb Master States Index Page >> >http://www.usgenweb.org >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> ==== PACHESTE Mailing List ==== >> Stop by our associated website for Chester >> County Genealogy at >> http://www.rootsweb.com/~pacheste/chester.htm >> >> >> >> > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! >http://mail.yahoo.com/ > > >==== PACHESTE Mailing List ==== >Stop by our associated website for Chester County Genealogy at >http://www.rootsweb.com/~pacheste/chester.htm > > > >