Keith Turner wrote:
Thank you for your response. What may be obvious to some isn't always to
others. It's never a bad idea to remind users how you want your data
formatted if there are roadblocks that are not obvious on the surface.
Most newsreaders, not just Thunderbird, use the posts'
Gregory Williamson wrote:
Well, off to top post on some other forums ... ;-)
statman wrote:
Mr. Picky Mode Should that not be Well, off to post on some other
fora? /Mr. Picky Mode 8¬
No. It /can/ be, but it /needn't/ be. Actually, saying fora is variously
considered affected, pompous or
Lew wrote:
Trevor Talbot wrote:
On 12/11/07, Guy Rouillier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, a gripe rightly attributable to the to PG mailing list setup is
that every time I reply, I have to:
(1) use reply all, because reply is set to go to the individual rather
than the list
(2) delete all
Gregory Williamson wrote:
* Get a life -- how people post is _trivial_. *content* over *form* !
Beating dead horses is of no interest other than the inherent joy in the
thing. Deal with the fact that an open mail ist will have users from
*all* backgrounds and origins and it you can't make
Lew wrote:
Trevor Talbot wrote:
On 12/11/07, Guy Rouillier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, a gripe rightly attributable to the to PG mailing list setup is
that every time I reply, I have to:
(1) use reply all, because reply is set to go to the individual rather
than the list
(2) delete all
Trevor Talbot wrote:
On 12/11/07, Guy Rouillier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, a gripe rightly attributable to the to PG mailing list setup is
that every time I reply, I have to:
(1) use reply all, because reply is set to go to the individual rather
than the list
(2) delete all the individual
Leif B. Kristensen wrote:
I me too.
t
' On Wednesday 12. December 2007, Gregory Stark wrote:
s Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Kellerer wrote:
n Joshua D. Drake, 11.12.2007 17:43:
o O.k. this might be a bit snooty but frankly it is almost 2008. If
t you are
On 12/15/07, Richard Huxton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
L Leif B. Kristensen wrote:
O I me too.
L t
' On Wednesday 12. December 2007, Gregory Stark wrote:
s Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Kellerer wrote:
n Joshua D. Drake, 11.12.2007 17:43:
o
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 01:55:04PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I'm really glad that people don't do that on this list. I /hate/ getting
individual email copies from list posters. I'm going to read it on the
list; why in the world would I want that clutter in my inbox?
Huh, you know
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 01:55:04PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I'm really glad that people don't do that on this list. I /hate/ getting
individual email copies from list posters. I'm going to read it on the
list; why in the world would I want that clutter in
On 11/12/2007, Obe, Regina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well said Greg. I have the same problem too of having a crippled mail
reader :) Really I find mid posting hard to follow especially if I'm the
one that posted the question. I hope we aren't going to hit people with
hammers over this
Peter Childs caused electrons to shape a message:
On 11/12/2007, Obe, Regina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well said Greg. I have the same problem too of having a crippled mail
reader :) Really I find mid posting hard to follow especially if I'm the
one that posted the question. I hope
Guy Rouillier wrote:
(2) delete all the individual addressees so only the list is left, then
change that from CC to TO
Why do you do that? It's unnecessary.
(3) change my from identity to the one used for the list; although the list
always posts to the identity I have set up for mailing
Joshua D. Drake, 11.12.2007 17:43:
O.k. this might be a bit snooty but frankly it is almost 2008. If you
are still a top poster, you obviously don't care about the people's
content that you are replying to, to have enough wits to not top post.
I personally find non-trimmed bottom postings at
Thomas Kellerer wrote:
Joshua D. Drake, 11.12.2007 17:43:
O.k. this might be a bit snooty but frankly it is almost 2008. If you
are still a top poster, you obviously don't care about the people's
content that you are replying to, to have enough wits to not top post.
I personally find
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Kellerer wrote:
Joshua D. Drake, 11.12.2007 17:43:
O.k. this might be a bit snooty but frankly it is almost 2008. If you
are still a top poster, you obviously don't care about the people's
content that you are replying to, to have enough wits
Gregory Williamson wrote:
Peter Childs caused electrons to shape a message:
On 11/12/2007, Obe, Regina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well said Greg. I have the same problem too of having a crippled
mail
reader :) Really I find mid posting hard to follow especially if
I'm the
one
You criticize that Joshua's reply was dogmatism but was yours any better?
I think people can see through these weak ad hominem arguments; no matter how
much you try to cast the technique in a negative light, that doesn't really
make it wrong, and in fact, there are many reasons to encourage
me too.
On Wednesday 12. December 2007, Gregory Stark wrote:
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Kellerer wrote:
Joshua D. Drake, 11.12.2007 17:43:
O.k. this might be a bit snooty but frankly it is almost 2008. If
you are still a top poster, you obviously don't care about the
Em Tuesday 11 December 2007 15:47:27 Joshua D. Drake escreveu:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:37:27 +
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gregory Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is for the sole use of the
Em Wednesday 12 December 2007 10:39:32 Alvaro Herrera escreveu:
It's not just you. Much as I am annoyed by top-posting, I am much more
so by people who top-post at the bottom. Hey, did I say something
stupid? No -- think about it. These guys do exactly the same thing as
top-posters,
Someone scolding wrote:
Please don't hijack other threads, the original thread was 'TIMESTAMP
difference'.
(don't answer to an arbitrary other mail and change the subject. Every
mail contains references-header)
I apologize; I had assumed that the threads were simply grouped by
Keith Turner wrote:
Someone scolding wrote:
Please don't hijack other threads, the original thread was 'TIMESTAMP
difference'.
I think it was probably intended as a *gentle* scolding. We try to be as
polite as possible on the PG lists. Particularly important given their
international nature
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 6:58 AM
To: Keith Turner
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Hijack!
Keith Turner wrote:
Someone scolding wrote:
Please don't hijack other threads, the original thread was 'TIMESTAMP
difference'.
I think it was probably
am Tue, dem 11.12.2007, um 14:57:57 + mailte Richard Huxton folgendes:
Keith Turner wrote:
Someone scolding wrote:
I wrote this ;-)
Please don't hijack other threads, the original thread was 'TIMESTAMP
difference'.
I think it was probably intended as a *gentle* scolding. We try to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 06:48:35 -0800
Keith Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I apologize; I had assumed that the threads were simply grouped by
subject. If this is such a problem, probably it should be laid out on
the list information page,
On 11/12/2007 14:57, Richard Huxton wrote:
It's one of those common knowledge things that are obvious to everyone
who's done it once themselves. It's just part of the nature of how email
works. Google around mailing list etiquette and you should see plenty
of guidelines.
It might be a good
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:31:40 +
Raymond O'Donnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
//
Please note in particular the following points of netiquette:
* Don't top-post, as it makes for confusing reading.
* Don't start a new thread by replying to an
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 08:43:44AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
O.k. this might be a bit snooty but frankly it is almost 2008. If you
are still a top poster, you obviously don't care about the people's
content that you are replying to, to have enough wits to not top post.
There are those
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 11:49:54 -0500
Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On a mailing list, perhaps one can argue that the conventions simply
have to be followed. But I know I find it pretty annoying to get 36
lines of quoted text followed by
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Joshua D. Drake
Sent: Tue 12/11/2007 9:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Hijack!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:31:40 +
Raymond O'Donnell
On Dec 11, 2007 10:49 AM, Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 08:43:44AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
O.k. this might be a bit snooty but frankly it is almost 2008. If you
are still a top poster, you obviously don't care about the people's
content that you
On Dec 11, 2007, at 8:43 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:31:40 +
Raymond O'Donnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
//
Please note in particular the following points of netiquette:
* Don't top-post, as it makes for confusing reading.
* Don't start a new thread by replying to
Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On a mailing list, perhaps one can argue that the conventions simply have to
be followed. But I know I find it pretty annoying to get 36 lines of quoted
text followed by something like, No: see the manual, section x.y.z.
Indeed, and that's why another
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 09:00:05AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 11:49:54 -0500
Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On a mailing list, perhaps one can argue that the conventions simply
have to be followed. But I
Gregory Williamson wrote:
* Try to see the world from a perspective other that your own
(admittedly superior) one ! Not everyone is so advanced.
* Get a life -- how people post is _trivial_. *content* over *form* !
Beating dead horses is of no interest other than the inherent joy in
the thing.
Gregory Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
privileged information and must be protected in accordance with those
provisions. Any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:03:39 -0700
Gregory Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, I would also note that in windows world, it is very
common to top post. I am constantly retraining very smart, just
very ignorant customers.
* Not all
Steve Atkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the business world it's common to top-post and not cut previous
content
- and often appropriate, as it tends to be a communication between a
smaller number of people, and the uncut content provides context for
future reference.
Those who rant
In response to Gregory Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Joshua D. Drake
Sent: Tue 12/11/2007 9:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Hijack!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE
On Tuesday 11. December 2007, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
I don't think top posting is always the crime it's made to be (and I
get a little tired of lectures to others about it on these lists).
It certainly isn't a crime. But it's a bit like thread hijacking in the
sense that a well-formed inline
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:37:27 +
Gregory Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gregory Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
On Dec 11, 2007, at 9:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Steve Atkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the business world it's common to top-post and not cut previous
content
- and often appropriate, as it tends to be a communication between a
smaller number of people, and the uncut content provides context
On Dec 11, 2007 11:41 AM, Leif B. Kristensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It certainly isn't a crime. But it's a bit like thread hijacking in the
sense that a well-formed inline posting is more likely to attract
intelligent replies. I don't think that I'm the only one who tends to
skip top
On Dec 11, 2007, at 12:00 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Dec 11, 2007 11:41 AM, Leif B. Kristensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It certainly isn't a crime. But it's a bit like thread hijacking
in the
sense that a well-formed inline posting is more likely to attract
intelligent replies. I don't
On Tuesday 11 December 2007 12:23, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
Simply replying to an argument with an assertion to the contrary is, I
think, dogmatism. The argument for top posting is that it is _easier_ to
read for certain kinds of cases. I have already rehearsed those arguments;
I think they
On Tuesday 11 December 2007 12:23, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 09:00:05AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 11:49:54 -0500
Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On a mailing list, perhaps one can
Steve Atkins wrote:
In the business world it's common to top-post and not cut previous content
- and often appropriate, as it tends to be a communication between a
smaller number of people, and the uncut content provides context for
future reference.
And it is quite common for tractor
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:00:00 -0600
Scott Marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're certainly not. I can't tell you how many times I've
carefully replied to someone with inline quoting, only to get some
top post response. I then ask them politely not to top post, fix
the format, reply, and get
] Hijack!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Joshua D. Drake
Sent: Tue 12/11/2007 9:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Hijack!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:31:40 +
Raymond
On 11/12/2007 17:41, Bill Moran wrote:
Again, you're asking a community to offer you free help in spite of the
fact that your tools suck. I'm not saying nobody will do it, all I'm
saying is that if you make it too difficult for people to help, they
won't.
I think this is the most important
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:00:00 -0600
Scott Marlowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're certainly not. I can't tell you how many times I've
carefully replied to someone with inline quoting, only to get some
top post response. I then ask them politely not to top post, fix
the format, reply, and get
Obe, Regina [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well said Greg. I have the same problem too of having a crippled mail
reader :) Really I find mid posting hard to follow especially if I'm
the one that posted the question. I hope we aren't going to hit people
with hammers over this minor infraction.
Greg Stark shaped the electrons to read:
Obe, Regina [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well said Greg. I have the same problem too of having a crippled mail
reader :) Really I find mid posting hard to follow especially if I'm
the one that posted the question. I hope we aren't going to hit
Gregory Williamson wrote:
* a lot of us have to use what ever the company provides as mail server.
Exchange sucks but I'd rather not quit my job just because _you_ have a
problem reading mail that does not conform to the T to your
expectations.
I'm guessing you use Outlook to connect to your
On 12/11/07, Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 06:48:35 -0800
Keith Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I apologize; I had assumed that the threads were simply grouped by
subject. If this is such a problem, probably it should be laid out on
the list information
On 12/11/07, Guy Rouillier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, a gripe rightly attributable to the to PG mailing list setup is
that every time I reply, I have to:
(1) use reply all, because reply is set to go to the individual rather
than the list
(2) delete all the individual addressees so only
57 matches
Mail list logo
