On Monday 08 April 2019 01:55:26 Roland Jollivet wrote: > I've thought about this, and don't agree. If people are following this > conversation, then it is fresh in their mind, and it's very easy to > read this post. It irks me to have to scroll down to find where > someone actually posted. > > So emails should be answered 'reflexivly'. If, however, if one > searches and finds a thread that is two years old, then you would > scroll to the bottom and start reading upwards. Why should everyone > post according to the chance event that someone will read the post at > some later date. A discussion for for people participating, not for > possible latecomers. > > If everybody top posted, it would make life easier for all. But it > needs to be consistent.. > And consistently ignored as rude and inconsiderate. When in Rome etc. > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 05:56, Erik Christiansen > <dva...@internode.on.net> > > wrote: > > On 31.03.19 11:17, John Dammeyer wrote: > > > > A: No. > > > > Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? > > > > > > > > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read > > > > text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? > > > > A: Top-posting. > > > > Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? > > > > Couldn't agree more. This ancient wisdom encourages consideration > > for the reader - and so may admittedly seem strange in this century. > > In-line replies, like this one, add a reply to a context. A top post > > is an answer without a question or context - good for skipping as > > impenetrable ass-backwards nonsense, IME. > > > > Or ... is it the custom in some quarters to read from the bottom up? > > It's the only thing which makes top posting intelligible, one has to > > admit. > > > > ... > > > > > If you are reading a once a week email of all the postings on a > > > subject then I can see wanting them all in order from top to > > > bottom. But otherwise it costs far more in concentration and time. > > > > You're too generous there, I think. Catching up on a week's¹ mail > > right now, there's nothing more useless than fullquoting, before or > > after. A considerate poster chops out the stuff he's not answering, > > leaving a "..." to indicate there's someone else's input left out of > > this part of the discussion. The shorter the quoted text, the > > better. It is after all, repetition of list traffic, and unnecessary > > verbiage to read through is an unkind theft of other people's time. > > > > Erik > > > > ¹ It's not that I read a digest, it's just that I've been out on the > > farm for a week. With threading, there's overall context from > > preceding posts, so it is a kindness to readers to quote only the > > sentences to be replied to, and to reply after the relevant > > question/proposition/opinion. Thus the reply has intelligibility > > through context. > > _______________________________________________ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene> _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
