I'm not sure how I should respond to this post, but I'll try.
"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]" wrote in message
news:%%23unvxRgEIHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
I am simply posting the most common reasons why posts go unanswered
Yes, perhaps so, but I don't see any place where I've been in violation of
these "7 commandments". My initial posts which are exact copy/pastes,
complete in every detail, will testify to that.
- it is certainly not boilerplate (although thanks for that idea) -
You're welcome. However, it is to be hoped that it will be employed only in
such cases as those which truly warrant it.
it was a response to your posting/complaint/whatever about why your posts
were not answered.
Which was when ?
"About Outlook and this newsgroup....:" Wednesday, October 17, 2007 3:56 PM.
My first question:
"customize" freezes - Outlook 2002" Monday, October 08, 2007 11:33 PM
I'd hardly see it fit to condemn me for a post of "complaint" which was made
9 days+ after a modicum of replies - which also had my own return questions
posed to them (unanswered) were made. Am I to assume that posters outside of
the fold have no worth; no value as people who are posting to a newsgroup
for assistance ? That 9 days is asking for instant "at my beck and call"
gratification ? Not in my opinion, it isn't.
As for your previous posts, I have a full time job, try to be in bed by
11ish and don't have the time or inclination to post first thing in the
morning -
I can relate to that.
trust me, you would not want to trust my answers first thing in the morning.
I might also be inaccurate / hasty / cantakerous / subject to gross error,
and so-forth at such times as the rising of morning gloom.(BTDT). :-D
As for patrolling this news group, I try to do it 3 or 4 days a week. If
your post goes unanswered by me, refer to the post by Brian - I have not run
Win98 or Win98SE since Y2K. I tend to skip posts with platforms or programs
I do not remember.
Understandable, yet perhaps a bit hasty to unseat "the old" (IMO). But you
are entitled to your choices and doubtless, have/ had your reasons. However,
this may or may not fully apply for those who've stepped forth and
'volunteered" though. Similarly, I do realize all people have other things
to do.
As for why I jumped in here, I tend to take it personally when the group and
MVPs in particular are taken to task for not being at poster's beck and
call.
My original post / subsequent post / tertiary post are well spaced;
exhibiting patience, and an even keel (IMO).
My *final post* (this thread herein) is of a different tenor - granted. But
I didn't just jump in and demand service. The dates and tenor of every one
of my prior posts stand quite clear in that. In short, I don't believe my
stance or my method (up until this thread) demanded that any respondants be
"at my beck and call" (from dawn 'til dusk). I still don't 'demand"
anything. I am simply "calling it as I see it".
Incidentally, I'm not new to these newsgroups; I don't use MS CDO web-based
newsreader or Google. I use OE solely as a newsreader and have myself
posted 1000's of posts in other newsgroups here in MS and have helped many
persons thoughout the years. I have merely taken a hiatus for a year or so.
If you wanted immediate help, then you could have contacted Microsoft
Product Support Services and paid for the support.
Please, cut me some slack here; How could anyone posit "9 days in the
waiting" as a request for "immediate help" ?
Here, the support is free and you get what, and when, you pay for.
Yes, that's right... and it should be known that the '"fix", fixed nothing.
lol :-D (Not any reflection on Diane Poremsky, nor Jocelyn Fiorello. Both
are fine persons - in my humble opinion - and did what they could to
*help*.)
Now this that follows you can take however you wish to (and you should try
and understand that it is not my intent to direct this at *you* per se.)
In the final analysis, it doesn't matter. I'll not use "customize"; it is
customized as much as I think I need or want.
It *is* broken however, and remains broken, but it's just not worth this
much hassle or time to me. By the same token, I too do not "need to be
abused or mischaracterized" by people who are habitues or MVP's of
newsgroups created - by Microsoft - for the purpose of helping people to
solve problems with a given application (such as Outlook, in this instance),
simply because after a period exceeding 9 days, I called it as it is.
It is less troublesome to re-install the thing, if that be my need - and
would have consumed far less of my time, efforts, and energies (for *all*
concerned). AND, would have fixed it without being slammed or abused *en
masse* by an entire army of MS-MVP's who suddenly decided to make a cameo
appearance.... and whom, for the most part (but not entirely), seem to not
have had much in the way of answers or to offer any help... but merely
appeared to express their indignation. To "misquote", not clearly read my
post, or to state "W98", when that was not what I clearly stated I was
using.
I guess if I were using WinXP (and I do use WinXP AAMOF) with Outlook 2003/
2007, then the MS-MVP's might have a handle on it. But in view of the
planned obsolesence and short memory, most MS-MVP's cannot help with
"antiques". That doesn't speak very much for the appellation, except perhaps
to Microsoft corp., who will soon regard WinXP as antique and regard it as
unworthy and forgettable as well.... prodding MVP's to get on with the new
and junk the old.
Yes... this "thread" received plenty of attention. My first three garnered
relatively little. But then, when it comes to helping someone with a
Microsoft Windows 98 second edition and a Microsoft Outlook 2002 in a
Microsoft Office XP package, it seems that few - if any - Microsoft MVP's
know how to help a person to fix the thing. Many MVP's know how to appear
and state.... what ?
My sincere thanks do go forth to both Diane Poremsky (MS-MVP) and to Jocelyn
Fiorello (not an MS-MVP), for they did genuinely try to help.
*very truly and sincerely* - and not with any ill will towards you, Milly
Staples.
Roxana
--
