[?][?][?][?] Its a dead thread people ..move on On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Incognito <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > What I find curios is that there are thousands of other people in this list > and you are the only one complaining. > > On Jun 1, 2009, at 6:14 AM, Charles <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
<<inline: 361.gif>>
