> Hi Charles,
>
> I frequently use quoted text to get the context of a thread when
> something of interest comes up or to remind me of how the thread ended
> up where it was. I actually find it annoying when other people don't
> include the text they're replying to, but hey, that's their choice and
> who am I to tell them how to construct their emails.
Hi Al,
If you are going to take the time to respond to a post, it is usually a
good idea to actually read the post you are responding to... in fact,
your obvious neglect in this regard is kind of ironic, considering the
'context' (pun intended)...
I didn't say 'please don't quote *anything*', I said:
"1. (best) trim/delete all of the totally irrelevant and unnecessary
quoted text from your posts - specifically including but not limited to
the endless repeats of your (way too long) 'signature' - or,"
I also didn't say anything bad about Outlook, even though I do
personally believe it fosters very poor email habits.
The fact is, blindly quoting the *entire* message, especially when the
quoted text consists of 2, 3, 4 or more copies of one (or more,
depending on how many people have responded to the thread in question)
ridiculously long signature(s) has nothing to do with 'context', and
everything to do with *laziness*, which is something Outlook has always
fostered.
I prefer to use a client that is capable (with the addition of an
extension) of letting me quote *only* the relevant part of a message I'm
replying to (for context), by simply highlighting the pertinent text
before clicking 'Reply'.
Also, while I do prefer bottom (or more properly, in-line) posting (a-la
this message you are reading now), I don't have a problem with
top-posting as long as the quoted text is limited to just what is
necessary to provide context.
That said, mindlessly quoting the entire message when bottom posting is
even worse than doing so while top-posting, which is obviously why
Microsoft chose to use top-posting as the default.
> I use Outlook 2007 due to my mail being on an Exchange server.
Al, I really don't care what client you use, and care even less what you
use for a server, but most importantly I fail to see what possible
relevance that has to my polite request to you to trim your posts.
> It's a shame your quoting extension can't cope with the quoting
> mechanism used by the mail client with the largest market share
It is impossible for QuoteCollapse (or any other program) to work with a
quoting mechanism that doesn't use a quoting character on every line for
the text being quoted. It is designed for in-line quoting - which is the
proper way to participate in email discussion lists, and which uses a
quoting character for every line of quoted text.
Of course, laziness fostered by the defaults provided by Microsoft
products is the reason this kind of problem exists, and it leaves people
like me (who prefer digest mode for many lists I'm on) with only a few
choices... politely ask the few offenders to trim their posts, and if
they refuse, put up with it or switch to the individual email version so
I can add the offenders posts to my crap-crud file...
> All versions of Outlook use a similar quoting system),
Yes, Outlook has very poorly chosen defaults... but it is very simple to
configure it properly (to use the standard quoting character).
> maybe it's worth updating your code to handle Outlooks quoting as
> it's not really an edge case in terms of quoting internet emails.
Outlook has *always* provided very poorly chosen defaults, because of
the LCD (least common denominator) factor, and when it attempts to
implement standards, does so equally poorly - for example, it couldn't
even save Sent messages to an IMAP server until the most recent version
2007...
Oh... and a sane email client is capable of cleaning up broken wrapping
of lines caused by other clients poor quoting capability.
Almost every other client out there uses a standard quoting character.
Some allow you to change it. Outlook is capable of using a standard
quoting character ('>'), but again, sadly it isn't the default.
> As for the signature, well most of it is legal junk
Al, again, please read what I wrote instead of making ass-u-me-ptions.
I wasn't complaining about your signature in your email. I was
complaining about MULTIPLE COPIES OF IT IN YOUR QUOTED TEXT (left there
from OTHER people's quotes of YOURS)... ie, if you reply, then someone
replies to you, then you reply back, etc there are now x copies of your
ridiculously long signature if both of you are blindly quoting the
entire message.
I asked nicely... if you want to be an ass and refuse to comply because
you're too lazy to be bothered or because you like irritating people,
then just say so.
--
Best regards,
Charles Marcus
I.T. Director
Media Brokers International, Inc.
678.514.6200 x224
678.514.6299 fax
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Android Discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
