Patrick or Cynthia Karl <[email protected]> writes: >> Message: 7 >> Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 18:56:35 -0800 (PST) >> From: soundsfromsound <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: lilypond-user Digest, Vol 120, Issue 36 >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> I replied to this: >> >> Optional-args-in-event-function-not-working-with-2-17-6-td136044.html#a136046 >> <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Optional-args-in-event-function-not-working-with-2-17-6-td136044.html#a136046> >> > > OK, I'm going to try one more time and then give up. Is there any > possibility you could follow the usual usenet etiquette and quote the > message you are responding to. Not in that one message. In general.
I think you are both a bit off here. The LilyPond user mailing list is _not_ Usenet. It is available for reading using NNTP from Gmane, and mirrored on a number of web interfaces, but just like "Internet" refers to a globally routed uniquely assigned IP number space (and partly a DNS namespace), Usenet refers to a globally assigned pool of newsgroup hierarchies which this mailing list is not part of. So "Usenet etiquette" does not apply here, even though most of it makes excellent sense and transfers perfectly well. Now the first thing to note here is that soundsfromsound was replying to a mailing list digest. For several reasons, it makes sense treating a digest (unless one's mail tool offers specific manners of dealing with a digest by splitting it into individual messages, like Gnus does with C-d IIRC) as read-only and not reply to the digest at all rather than getting the individual message to reply to. That has several reasons: a) "quote the message you are responding to", interpreted naively, will quote the whole digest. Which, among other things, will let the whole quoted digest appear as part of the next digest. It is obvious that this is not sustainable. b) Message headers in both mail as well as NNTP reflect the history of a thread, making it possible to add missing parts of context for the reader. Both mail and web interfaces interpret "threading" of messages according to those headers, and the headers of a digest are not helpful for that. Now it turns out that quoting what one is replying to in full is also not desirable. Instead, one should trim the original to just the relevant, explicitly referenced parts and reply to those individually. I have checked our information in <URL:http://lilypond.org/contact> as well as the list info at our list server: neither contain a reference to netiquette, whether mailing list etiquette or Usenet etiquette. So for better or worse, first time participants can't be reasonably expected to know the fine points of how to move about on our mailing lists. So there is no point in making a spectacle out of telling them. All the best, -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
