5.0175 Rs: E-Mail Reading and E-Job Searching (3/57)

Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Fri, 21 Jun 91 16:41:39 EDT

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 5, No. 0175. Friday, 21 Jun 1991.


(1) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 91 0:09:47 PDT (23 lines)
From: James Crump <jjcrump@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: Mail Readers

(2) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 91 06:59:41 CDT (14 lines)
From: nm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Natalie Maynor)
Subject: Apology for Non Sequitur

(3) Date: Thu, 20 Jun 91 18:25 EDT (20 lines)
From: Diane Kovacs <LIBRK329@ksuvxa.kent.edu>
Subject: RE: 5.0167 E-Job Searching

(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 91 0:09:47 PDT
From: James Crump <jjcrump@u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: Mail Readers

> I always use nn (rather than rn) to read the news groups. And I always
> respond from within nn. I enter 'f' to post a reply to the group, 'r'
> to mail a reply to the individual poster, 'm' to mail to somebody else,
> :post to post a new article, etc.

There seems to have been some confusion concerning my last posting.
While it is of course true that it is possible to respond to postings
on a usenet newsgroup from within nn (that is what it was designed for
after all), I simply wanted to share my discovery that it could also
be used to read folders containing only e-mail such as that received
from a listserv subscription. The header of an e-mail message is
different from that of a newsgroup posting and nn will not allow you
to respond to it, but I have found it useful for reading and filing
messages from listserv based groups such as humanist, ansax-l and the
like. If anyone knows a way to force nn to respond to ordinary e-mail
correctly without editing the header, I would like to hear about it.

Jon Crump
jjcrump@milton.u.washington.edu
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------24----
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 91 06:59:41 CDT
From: nm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Natalie Maynor)
Subject: Apology for Non Sequitur

When I saw my recent posting re nn and actually read the comments I had
quoted in it, I realized that my reply was a non sequitur. So much for
high-tech quoting. At least in the old days of manual quoting, one tended
to read what was being quoted. I save moderated lists that arrive in
clumps to read last and thus often read them with a brain fried from
just having made my way through hundreds of pieces of mail. I thought
I should post this explanation so that the person who first mentioned nn
won't sit there pondering the relationship of my stupid answer to the
original point.
--Natalie (nm1@ra.msstate.edu)
(3) --------------------------------------------------------------27----
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 91 18:25 EDT
From: Diane Kovacs <LIBRK329@ksuvxa.kent.edu>
Subject: RE: 5.0167 E-Job Searching

Re: e-Job Searching.

I see no reason why E-mail cannot function in the same way that the
telephone does in the job search process. I had several queries via
e-mail to ask if I was interested in the job...and to establish a date
and time for interview. I also don't think that the computer services
people that see my e-mail will violate confidentiality in this matter
anymore than they would in the matter of all the financial data that
they see. Furthermore, they do not monitor mail....where on earth would
they get the time?

Diane K. Kovacs
Kent State University
librk329@kentvms
librk329@ksuvxa.kent.edu