On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:43 AM, Stephen Bain <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > This post below, I've pretty much ignored > > because it wasn't worth trying to sort through who said what. > > Yet instead of deleting it, you included the whole thing. > Correct. It wasn't worth reading, but it was useful as an example of something that isn't worth reading. Yeah, it sucks for people reading their mail with a 2400 bps modem, but I don't think everyone else should have to suffer through ambiguous messages for the sake of those few. On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Svip <[email protected]> wrote: > I am still uncertain whether his comment that it was an example of a > 'good toppost' was a joke, because I am getting that feeling. > No, wasn't a joke. Sometimes topposting is good. Specifically, when you are replying to a message in its entirety, and not any particular part of it. This was an example. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
