On Mar 22, 2008, at 2:02 AM, wright-request@rootsweb.com wrote: It would really be helpful of posters would follow a few simple practices. WRIGHT Digest v3 i95 was almost impossible to follow like so many of the other recent digests because it's so cluttered and the subject lines are almost meaningless. Wading through all this for some tiny snippet about my own John Wright brick wall is like herding cats. If you're posting about some particular Wright it's a good idea to put the name and birth year in the subject-- John WRIGHT 1804-- and maybe a location --St Brides VA-- after. It's interesting reading about other people's relatives but sometimes distracting. When you change the topic change the subject line. Digest v3 i95 dealt with 3 subjects and used the same header line. Identical subjects on different topics makes searching the archives very confusing. When you reply to a previous post you really need to quote briefly and to the point. Don't quote the whole message--just the part you're replying to. Trim out all the previous headers and footers, like the unsubscribe instructions and the AOL ads. Refutation without citing sources turns a discussion into a shouting match. 'Was!' 'Was not!' 'Was!' 'Was not!' isn't very helpful. For example I couldn't tell which Richard Wright wasn't born in Connecticut. I daresay a number of Richard Wrights _were_ born in Connecticut as well as many who weren't. It'd really be helpful to know which Richard Wright wasn't born in Connecticut and how you know for certain. I'll risk seeming like a selfish nag, but wading through great meaningless clumps of unattributed statements and repeated unsubscribe instructions makes my hitherto fruitless search for John WRIGHT 1804 snippets even more forlorn. Christopher Wright P.E. |"They couldn't hit an elephant at chrisw@skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen. .......................................| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania 1864) http://www.skypoint.com/~chrisw/