I actually favor top-posting (can you believe there's even a name for that practice?). But I'm a firm believer in trimming replies so that what remains is pertinent to your response, but not because of size and bandwidth issues, as Aaron points out. It certainly makes it easier for digest-folks so they don't have to wade through multiply repeated headers and re-re-quoted material. Too much editing can be bad too. I'm on a neighborhood group where some delete everything, and it's rarely clear what they intend.
|-----Original Message----- |From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of |Aaron Sherber |Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:23 AM |To: [email protected] |Subject: Re: [Finale] What quoting all of a popular thread does | |On 2/5/2015 4:51 PM, Kenneth Moore wrote: |> In the early days of email, ISTR |> that recommended practice was to quote only the most recent |> contribution to a thread. | |Yes, and also to put your reply under the relevant quote, like so. But I'm afraid |that both of these battles have largely been lost. In the context of modern email, |the difference between 55KB and 9KB is trivial in terms of storage and bandwidth |– even though the older conventions also made comprehension much easier in |terms of seeing exactly what was being replied to. Sic transit etc. _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: [email protected]
