> My guess is that Allen, like Peter, uses the website to track messages so 
> it is easy to see the progression of a topic. So, for those who use the 
> website, it might make sense to do it his way.

I use both, partly because the brain-dead LISTSERV will not send me copies 
of my own posts, regardless of what I do.

(I might mention here that significantly more people would likely post if 
they could manage to get subscribed and/or if the web interface would work 
well enough not to dump their messages into the bit bucket when the are 
finished writing and hit the submit button).

> But there are many of us who get the list by email. There is no thread to 
> follow other than the subject which usually goes in many different 
> directions.

The web interface is a good way to read the list for the reasons Peter 
mentioned, but any decent email software will offer a threaded view, or 
"Group messages by conversation" option.  Of course, if members delete 
messages immediately as they are read, they are defeating this feature in 
their mail reader.  I can't see why I should fill my posts with attributions 
for those folks.

Threading is never flawless, however, since some consistently break the 
threads, due to not understanding how threading works, and the function of 
"reply".

> Occasionally you  will see a reply to an email before you get the original 
> email.

That may be an inadequacy of the LISTSERV, or simply a problem with the 
recipient's ISP--too small a mailbox, or a failure to check email often 
enough to prevent a full inbox (resulting in messages held in limbo on the 
LISTSERV, awaiting re-tries).  Hopefully, this is unusual.

> I usually delete email after reading so do have a problem figuring out 
> just who Allen is replying to.

Well, I think you just solved your own problem.  I think that most of us 
serious BEE-L mreaders accumulate BEE-L posts in a separate folder, using 
rules to send them there automatically, then clean out the oldest posts 
periodically.  That way, everything is at hand for reference--instantly. 
Some of us read and re-read posts and the thread several times before 
replying.  I recommend it.

> I see little problem in someone quoting my quote and having me defend it, 
> even if the defense is "It is only a quote." At least they know who to 
> ask.

If people can't figure out who said what--assuming it matters that 
much--then maybe we are better off without their comments.  A review of the 
thread before replying if memory is faint is de rigeur IMO, as is carefully 
reviewing and proofing the reply before hitting, "Send".

(FWIW, I have noticed that people sort roughly into two types; those that 
care more about what was said, and those who care more about who said it. 
Both get into debates, but the nature of those debates differ considerably. 
Personally, I *much* prefer to discuss with the former than the latter, so I 
naturally avoid accommodating them, I guess).

When we converse on BEE-L, we are usually in conversation with the entire 
list.  If we use a quote, generally the writer of the quote knows it is his 
or hers and will reply--or not, particularly if folowing in a specific 
thread.

> I look at it more as a courtesy.

There are pros and there are cons to this "courtesy".  IMO, there are more 
cons, and one is that it can turn into discourtesy.

> The BeeL does not allow "excessive quotes", so it is nice for us who do 
> not use the website to have the sender's name so you can tell where you 
> are in wonderland.

Well, we could have a messy list with archives that are impossible to read, 
and huge nested posts containing mostly redundant material, and attributions 
of questionable accuracy (and the inevitable complaints about erroneous 
attributions) or we could ask our members to learn to use their email 
software and to save messages for a week or two before discarding if they 
think they may wish to join the thread.

Someone asked me what "PMFJI" means.  It is short for "Pardon Me For Jumping 
In".  No one should need to ask pardon for jumping in on BEE-L.  BEE-L is 
for open, round table discussion and any topic is open to anyone. I suppose 
I could also mention, tho'  that there are" posting pigs" who feel they have 
to reply to every post about anything, but maybe I should just shut up now, 
since that would be me, (amongst a few others). 

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---