
Signature
Steve Schapel, Microsoft Access MVP
Thanks for your thoughts. That said, even thought the .macro group is the prime source for my
questions, there is very little response in that group. So I post both to: 1st get any response,
and 2nd, to see if I can wake up the .macro group.
In comparison, the Excel "monitors" are much more active. Bottom line, my intent is positive.
EagleOne
>EagleOne,
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>message simultaneously to both groups) rather than multi-post (i.e. send
>a separate copy of the message to each group). Thanks.
Steve Schapel - 25 May 2008 03:54 GMT
Thanks, EagleOne. However, I feel you missed the point. Post to both
if you must - just do it by addressing the same message simultaneously
to both. That way, responses can be seen by participants in both
groups. It is irritating to spend time answering a question, only to
find that the original question was multi-posted, and the help has
already been adequately provided elsewhere. You see?

Signature
Steve Schapel, Microsoft Access MVP
> Thanks for your thoughts. That said, even thought the .macro group is the prime source for my
> questions, there is very little response in that group. So I post both to: 1st get any response,
> and 2nd, to see if I can wake up the .macro group.
>
> In comparison, the Excel "monitors" are much more active. Bottom line, my intent is positive.