Re: [gentoo-user] E-mail quote protocol -- WAS: Re: No HTML in posts?
Calvin Spealman wrote: Simply put, the list just works. And it works because we have all agreed on how we're going to make it work. If you want to be part of the process and want to live under the established standard that we're all happy with, fine and welcome. So you say both follow normal channels to get the standard changes, and live with them as they are like everyone else does.. Which is it? Pick one. No, don't. I don't like the one I think you would pick. No, it's saying that you follow accepted convention until such a time that convention is changed through appropriate means. For example, in a governing body such as the Senate, you can motion for a change in standard procedure, but until the motion is voted on, approved by the majority and becomes accepted as the new standard procedure, you are still obliged to follow the old one. Moreover, when functioning as a part of a group, you should function in a way that is agreed upon by the majority. You may believe that your way is better or more efficient, but no matter how innovative you feel your ideas are (and you may very well have innovative ideas), if you work against the grain of the majority, you do nothing more than upset the group and ultimately make the group less efficient. In short, it's a matter of etiquette. Yes, etiquette changes with time, but it's a gradual change that moves with the tide of the majority, not a sudden shift in behavior by an individual or by a select few. Disclaimer: no disrespect is intended. Just throwing my 2 cents in :) James -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] E-mail quote protocol -- WAS: Re: No HTML in posts?
Holly Bostick wrote: Calvin Spealman schreef: On 5/9/05, Dave Nebinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're looking at years worth of standards that have been built up and saying after all of that time they need to be changed. Yeah, things change. Two words: the wheel. Holly Holly, Again, well said. Calvin made good, reasonable points. His last and your previous wee the best two in this whole list. (I love to be able to say something nice! grin) Signing offa this one! rgh. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] E-mail quote protocol -- WAS: Re: No HTML in posts?
On Sat, 7 May 2005 16:56:09 +, Calvin Spealman wrote: If the mailers follow the proper multipart protocols and also make it easy to hide quoted emails, move to see the original ones, etc (to add incentives to use the protocol), then support for it can grow until everyone will have updated just over time. once you know someone's reader has support for it, because they send you emails using it, you can send to them without the old inline-quoted version. If each quoted mail is a separate message part, how the hell are you suppose to interleave your comments with the points you are replying to? This sounds like another idea to add new standards in order to make mail less usable. -- Neil Bothwick If you catch an exploding manhole cover, you can keep it. pgpb34MmfxACJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: [gentoo-user] E-mail quote protocol -- WAS: Re: No HTML in posts?
If the mailers follow the proper multipart protocols and also make it easy to hide quoted emails, move to see the original ones, etc (to add incentives to use the protocol), then support for it can grow until everyone will have updated just over time. once you know someone's reader has support for it, because they send you emails using it, you can send to them without the old inline-quoted version. [snip] Calvin, you're whole problem appears to be that the email on the list should be modified to support your own desires. Posting in html because you prefer it. Top posting to responses rather than scrolling to the bottom of the quoted text (thus actually viewing the quoted text and snipping the unnecessary parts). You're looking at years worth of standards that have been built up and saying after all of that time they need to be changed. Fine - if you feel so strongly about it post an RFC and follow the normal process for having standards changed. Your effort to post on this list will not convince anyone nor would it make any substantial change. Simply put, the list just works. And it works because we have all agreed on how we're going to make it work. If you want to be part of the process and want to live under the established standard that we're all happy with, fine and welcome. But if all you want to do is rant over how we're not doing things the way you think they should be done, then maybe the email list is not for you. Go to the forums where you can use HTML to your hearts content. But don't keep trying to drag the list OT to justify your narrow position on how the email list should work. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] E-mail quote protocol -- WAS: Re: No HTML in posts?
The replies would include instructions for which sections of the original messages to quote. On 5/9/05, Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 7 May 2005 16:56:09 +, Calvin Spealman wrote: If the mailers follow the proper multipart protocols and also make it easy to hide quoted emails, move to see the original ones, etc (to add incentives to use the protocol), then support for it can grow until everyone will have updated just over time. once you know someone's reader has support for it, because they send you emails using it, you can send to them without the old inline-quoted version. If each quoted mail is a separate message part, how the hell are you suppose to interleave your comments with the points you are replying to? This sounds like another idea to add new standards in order to make mail less usable. -- Neil Bothwick If you catch an exploding manhole cover, you can keep it. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] E-mail quote protocol -- WAS: Re: No HTML in posts?
On Mon, 9 May 2005 10:38:39 -0400, Calvin Spealman wrote: The replies would include instructions for which sections of the original messages to quote. From where would it get those instructions when the person proposing the method can't even place his replies in context? -- Neil Bothwick Theory is when you know everything, but nothing works. Reality is when everything works, but you don't know why. However, usually theory and reality are mixed together : Nothing works, and nobody knows why not. pgp2Y0VSi591D.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] E-mail quote protocol -- WAS: Re: No HTML in posts?
If the mailers follow the proper multipart protocols and also make it easy to hide quoted emails, move to see the original ones, etc (to add incentives to use the protocol), then support for it can grow until everyone will have updated just over time. once you know someone's reader has support for it, because they send you emails using it, you can send to them without the old inline-quoted version. On 5/6/05, Robert G. Hays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem with this will be getting *all* the email readers updated with this *entire* feature, -and- getting everyone to update to said newer versions *or* programs if/When! -their- favorite didn't get updated for this. That said, it sounds like a FINE idea to me. Now, where'd I put that blamed crowbar? rgh. Calvin Spealman wrote: I know I said I was out of this conversation, but this off the original topic so I want to make myself clear on what I actually meant here. E-mails have unique identifiers, and replies include information in the header as to the identifier(s) of the original messages. Thus, if you have the messages (or access to a service archiving them) you could reconstruct the entire thread from just a single message. A protocol or format could even be created to designate where and how other messages are quoted, without actually including the content. This would be especially useful for very large messages and replying to multiple messages at once. Always there is room to move forward, so find the door that need's unlocked and break it down. On 5/5/05, Robert G. Hays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Calvin Spealman wrote: snip it isn't like the bandwidth is anything at all compared to the bloated headers and redundant repeating of messages in every reply. snip -- is a good way to control redundancy factor And sometimes someone skips the original(s), and the later msgs become interesting, and someone needs to catch up. Sigh, no soution is ever perfect. rgh. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
