Lack of response to question posted in this group

[Pyramid 36]

On May 19th another user and I (burnt) independent of one another posted
questions about Word not opening a document. In checking today, I don't see
a response to either question. Speaking only for myself, I would classify
the problem as an annoyance, but it becomes more so as the days go on.

Please understand this is not a rant and I really appreciate the help. Just
thought this might have been overlooked and wanted to raise it's visibility.

Thanks for your help

 

[Jezebel]

You might try asking the question again --

a) Drop the references to other posts. People don't necessarily read the
posts in chronological order, so it's never going to be clear what 'previous
post' refers to.

b) If you want an answer, you actually need to ask a question and provide
enough detail for someone to hazard a guess as to the cause of the problem.

 

[macropod]

Maybe the questions would be better asked in an Outlook forum, since they
concern that application's instantiations of Word.

Cheers

 

[Pyramid 36]

Jezebel,
Thanks.

a) Good point about the reference to the previous post. I believed,
however, that my post stood on it's own merits and the reference to another
post was parenthetical. At any rate, point well taken and in the future,
I'll be sure to provide more specifics vis a vis the other post or not refer
at all.

b) Did I do something to warrant the sarcasm here? I thought I described
the problem pretty clearly though I confess I neglected to include an
interrogative sentence. My experience with MS Newsgroups over the past 8 or
10 years has been that a clear description of what happened usually either 1)
gets an answer, or 2) I'm prompted for more details where needed.

Again, this thread was not intended as a slight of any sort on the people
who respond to people's request. I am really appreciative of the help that
is provided, especially since I understand that it is provided on a voluntary
basis.

I will post the problem again with as much detail as I can muster and hope
that someone can shed some light.
--
Pyramid 36 "Ken"

You might try asking the question again --

a) Drop the references to other posts. People don't necessarily read the
posts in chronological order, so it's never going to be clear what 'previous
post' refers to.

b) If you want an answer, you actually need to ask a question and provide
enough detail for someone to hazard a guess as to the cause of the problem.

 

[Pyramid 36]

Macropod,
I'll try the OL as well, though I believe this may be "bigger" than OL. I
seem to recall the same experience with another application, but can't recall
at the moment. If I can recall the events or if it happens again, I'll get
back.
--
Pyramid 36 "Ken"

Maybe the questions would be better asked in an Outlook forum, since they
concern that application's instantiations of Word.

Cheers

 

[Charles Kenyon]

You did nothing special to warrant sarcasm. Jezebel shares it with all of us
equally.
--
Charles Kenyon

Word New User FAQ & Web Directory: http://addbalance.com/word

Intermediate User's Guide to Microsoft Word (supplemented version of
Microsoft's Legal Users' Guide) http://addbalance.com/usersguide




--------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
This message is posted to a newsgroup. Please post replies
and questions to the newsgroup so that others can learn
from my ignorance and your wisdom.

Jezebel,
Thanks.

a) Good point about the reference to the previous post. I believed,
however, that my post stood on it's own merits and the reference to
another
post was parenthetical. At any rate, point well taken and in the future,
I'll be sure to provide more specifics vis a vis the other post or not
refer
at all.

b) Did I do something to warrant the sarcasm here? I thought I described
the problem pretty clearly though I confess I neglected to include an
interrogative sentence. My experience with MS Newsgroups over the past 8
or
10 years has been that a clear description of what happened usually either
1)
gets an answer, or 2) I'm prompted for more details where needed.

Again, this thread was not intended as a slight of any sort on the people
who respond to people's request. I am really appreciative of the help
that
is provided, especially since I understand that it is provided on a
voluntary
basis.

I will post the problem again with as much detail as I can muster and hope
that someone can shed some light.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

I think Jezebel was referring to your initial post in this particular
thread. You write:

"On May 19th another user and I (burnt) independent of one another posted
questions about Word not opening a document. In checking today, I don't see
a response to either question. Speaking only for myself, I would classify
the problem as an annoyance, but it becomes more so as the days go on.

"Please understand this is not a rant and I really appreciate the help.
Just
thought this might have been overlooked and wanted to raise it's visibility.

"Thanks for your help."

I think you will have to agree that this does not contain any question or
any clear description of the problem.

Jezebel,
Thanks.

a) Good point about the reference to the previous post. I believed,
however, that my post stood on it's own merits and the reference to another
post was parenthetical. At any rate, point well taken and in the future,
I'll be sure to provide more specifics vis a vis the other post or not refer
at all.

b) Did I do something to warrant the sarcasm here? I thought I described
the problem pretty clearly though I confess I neglected to include an
interrogative sentence. My experience with MS Newsgroups over the past 8 or
10 years has been that a clear description of what happened usually either 1)
gets an answer, or 2) I'm prompted for more details where needed.

Again, this thread was not intended as a slight of any sort on the people
who respond to people's request. I am really appreciative of the help that
is provided, especially since I understand that it is provided on a voluntary
basis.

I will post the problem again with as much detail as I can muster and hope
that someone can shed some light.

 

[Pyramid 36]

Suzanne,
I see what you're saying only that was not my initial response; that was on
May 19th. It's ironic that there's been all this traffic about the "lack of
response" and there's been minimal response to the problem .

So.... with everyone's permission, I'm going to drop this and start all over.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

I said "initial post in this thread," not "initial response." And only
Jezebel can say for sure whether that's what he/she meant.