Eric Dannewitz wrote:
Erg. Whatever. I think it's insane to wade through all the quotes/quotes
and more quotes to read something at the END of a message. If people
replied at the top to messages, you can still see the order of the
"conversation" and easily see what the person had to say.....
Isn't that what is more important, keeping the order of the conversation
intact?
[snip]
Yes, keeping the order of conversation intact is the most important, and
since there's no uniform way for e-mail clients to do this, we end up
with replies on both ends of an original message, which no clue whether
the newest response is replying to the original message, which lies
immediately below it (assuming the newest responder is a top-responder)
or the first reply which lies below the original message (assuming the
first reply came from a bottom-responder.)
Ultimately I don't care whether people reply on top or bottom as long as
the logical flow of the conversation is clear. And it seems that it
most clear most of the time when people simply bottom respond following
previous postings, snipping whatever is extraneous to a clear
understanding of the conversation even for a person who is just entering
the conversation reading that message.
--
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
