On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Michael Shadle <mike...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Nathan Nobbe <quickshif...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > what does syntax highlighting have to do w/ a mess of text that could be
> > sorted out by folks willing to take the extra 2 seconds to put their
> > thoughts at the bottom of a mail?
> > i doubt there are any web-based lists that reorganize top-posted replies,
> > but if you find one, id love to see it :P
> because it de-dupes or changes colors for the previous replies.

shrug, it still doesnt organize the responses into the cohesive manor
correlating specific responses to specific portions of the previous message.
 ive found this technology to be fickle as it's based on > characters being
embedded into responses, which of course are not properly done when

> and again - it doesn't take 2 seconds to clean up an email and throw a
> reply at the bottom on something like an iphone. that can take a
> while.

just like dan, i have chosen to refrain from posting until a later time,
like when i get home, or for someone else to invariably post next to the
same thing i would have in the absence of said post.  if i have something
monumental to say that no one else does, i have the patience to wait that 30
minutes or w/e to get home and post it.

> at the end of the day, i don't give a crap how people post. i am able to
> read anyone's messages just fine.

you clearly are a very gifted individual Michael.

> i don't know why anyone is complaining in the modern age.

see the previous posts in this thread.

i've found top-posting to be useful in the corporate environment where the
people i'm working with are too ignorant to understand the rationale.
 however, when you're working with programmers, i think the expectation is
more than reasonable as well the rationale behind it being understood.
 top-posting is also useful for trivial communications where only 1 or 2
replies will ever be sent.  however, in long running complicated threads it
quickly results in replies that are difficult to follow, specifically b/c it
becomes non-trivial to correlate which portion of the previous message the
author was addressing; at the very least, it introduces ambiguity.

and more to the topic of this thread, the degradation of the communication
here is a great example of another reason i've stopped being so active.
 there are standards established by the list, if you can't follow them,
maybe you belong on the sidelines as an observer.


Reply via email to