Bill Ellis writes:

> The amount that can be archived is limited by the sum of the 
> length of all messages. This is why replies should always 
> severely prune down the previous attached message 

This was in response to Leslie Starr's request:

> I especially appreciate those that have sightings in an 
> easy-to-read format: a vertical list, preferably in AOU 
> order

I think these are two separate issues.  Personally, I find the long lists of birds with no comments less interesting than the more verbose lists with lots of "local coler" etc, but, again, that's my taste and not others.  I have no interest in imposing a format on reports of bird sightings.  As far as I'm concerned, anything and everything is acceptable.

On the other hand, Bill's comments hit on one of my pet peeves, one that I am also guilty of committing, and that is not editing down attached messages.  This represents an enormous waste of space in the archives.  Right now I manage to maintain about three years of past messages in the space allotted for the archives.  If people were more careful about editing their responses to MDOsprey, then that would likely be 4 years or more.  So, when you respond to a long chain of mesages and don't edit out the earlier messages, you're really hurting everyone and limiting the usefulness of the list to everyone.  Think about it.

Best,
Norm Saunders
Cambridge & West Ocean City, MD