On 12.04.2013, at 2:14AM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Colin J. Williams <cjwilliam...@gmail.com> > wrote: > On 11/04/2013 7:20 PM, Paul Hobson wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Doug Coleman <doug.cole...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Also, gmail "bottom-posts" by default. It's transparent to gmail users. I'd >> imagine they are some of the biggest offenders. >> >> Interesting. Mine go to the top by default and I always have to expand the >> quoted text, trim down as necessary, and then reply below the relevant bits. >> A quick gander at gmail's setting doesn't offer anything obvious. I'll dig >> deeper later. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NumPy-Discussion mailing list >> >> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org >> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > Bottom posting seems to be the accepted Usenet standard. > > I don't care, can't someone can make a decision, so that we all do the same > thing? > > Please develop a rationale or toss a coin and let us know. Numpy needs a > BDFL (or a shorter term, if you wish). > > > It's always been bottom posting. In German this kind of faux pas is usually labelled "TOFU" for "text on top, full quote underneath", and I think it has been a bit overlooked so far that the "full quote" part probably is the bigger problem. IOW a call to try and trim the OP more rigourously should help a lot, and I'd think most people then can agree on bottom posting (and I know the issue with mail clients doing that automatically - the thread in question looks quite readable in Mountain Lion's Mail.app, but a nightmare on Snow Leopard!). Cheers, Derek _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
