On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 2:57 PM, DoOrsOfpErcEpTioN <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Don't you think it makes sense to read the question first and then >> read the answer below it? > > It makes sense to read question and then answer. how else any1 would do > otherwise?
This post of yours is much nicer and much easier to read. Why? Because you have used bottom-posting and inline-posting. Wonderful! >> If people top-post, they will not remove >> unnecessary lines from the original mail. A combination of not >> over-quoting and not top-posting is the solution here. > > The above is quite a subjective issue. Some ppl like me can use snip-in > format of reply. This reply to u is a snip without the use of '<snip>' > since we have '>' to indicate former response. > Some just dont delete former response(s) may be bcos: (a) it is either > included by default and/or (b) modifying original reponse is an > unethical practice. > I think classical semantics (that u r highlighting) do not approve of > modifying original either! There is a differnce between "modifying" the original post and "snipping" unwanted lines. "Modifying" is when you replace words and alter the meaning of the original post. Members can always refer to the earlier mail in its entirety if they want to read the removed lines. The question of ethics does not arise because the original mail is there for all to see. > >> I guess people who top-post are plain lazy and don't want to take the >> effort to scroll down and remove unnecesaary lines before typing their >> message. Top-posting might be fine at your office, but on GNU/Linux >> lists, it is looked down upon. Google for it and you will know why. > > Lazy? -- well that is clearly your point of view and would be incorrect > to generalise it. I guess you respond to our posts from Evolution (or > other email client) rather than using groups webpage. I use gmail because I access my mail from multiple laptops. I do not use the group webpage because it is too fussy to visit each time I want to send a mail. Since I use the > web over email clients I find posts are well sorted by Yahoo and I dont > actually need the apporach you are talking about. > And if you would google you would also know that web semantics are now > moving away from classical approach and may generalise to top-down > approach. GNU/Linux lists are quite old and follow the classical > approach -- it could be technical or just an approach. Linuxvadapav is usually the first GNU/Linux list that a Linux newbie joins. We want him/her to be fully versed with mailing list etiquette because when he/she joins a bigger, stricter, more mature list in the future, he/she should appear mailing-list savvy and not get flamed by that list. Being a moderator, I get am email whenever a member unsubscribes. Believe me, a number of experienced, knowledgeable folks have unsubscribed simply because this list had no etiquette at one time. > >> I think Linuxvadapav is the only GNU/Linux list that still approves >> messages that are top-posted. Try doing this on other *mature* lists >> and you will be flamed, warned, and eventually banned. > > Flaming, warning, and eventually banning an individual for a writing > approach is outright immature when there is no necessity to imeplement > it. We have never banned any member for top-posting. There *is* a necessity to implement bottom-posting simply because it is painful to read posts that are top-posted. If you think LinuxVadapav should stick to classical structures, then > y host this group here--in yahoo? This group was founded by Sanman and I am the second member. We did not have much resources to host elsewhere. Today, I can host it wherever you want with a dedicated domain name. The only thing that stops me from doing so is migration of all members to the new setup. If you can think of some approach, we can implement this. Also, I wouldn't have much time to maintain such a list. Yahoo is pretty much simple to maintain. If members volunteer to become *serious* moderators, we can host the list elsewhere. > > regards! Think of the positive aspects of linuxvadapav. There is virtually no spam, no irrelevant posts, no foul language. This is a direct result of us following web standards. As you have mentioned about web standards, please let us know how many other GNU/Linux lists you have subscribed to and how many of them actually allow top-posting. We don't make guidilines just like that - we follow web standards - with some modificaitons to make it more fun. Every guideline has a reason. I would be glad to explain if you ask. Regards, NMK.
