I respectfully disagree -- please jump to the bottom per your comment.
On 06/30/2011 10:02 AM, Alan Bartlett wrote:
On 30 June 2011 17:43, Dan M.<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thursday 30 June 2011 12:30:08 Alexander Hunt wrote:
Hi,
I'm not seeing any issue with threading here; all of the subject lines
in Yashas emails are relevant to the topic in the body. Just for info I
use Thunderbird as well, but the sl-security version.
Regards to all,
Alex
Here is the offending header portion:
To: "[email protected]"<[email protected]>
Subject: How to use a local SL 6 printer with VirtualBox MS Win XP Pro
References:
<545430358.74671.1309378877083.javamail.r...@linzimmb05o.imo.intelink.gov>
<[email protected]><[email protected]>
--> In-reply-to:<[email protected]> <---
Sender: [email protected]
Precedence: list
----
It's just good practice to create a new email and not reply wiping the
information out, as it not all email clients work in the same manner.
Much like sending HTML messages to a listserv.
/Dan
All,
Whilst nits are being picked out, will you please also desist from
"top posting". Trim the post to which you are replying and then
"bottom post".
Alan.
Under the conditions that "snipping" allows one to still get the full
context of an email history exchange -- often with information/comments
interspersed within the body of various preceding email posts -- then it
is justified. Otherwise, I find that I cannot reconstruct the detailed
issues. If there is no interspersed emails, then threading will (more
or less) allow your suggestion to work.
As for top or bottom posts, I and many others with whom I have discussed
this point over a number of years prefer top posting so that one can
immediately get to the new information, rather than going to the bottom
of a perhaps otherwise unintelligible set of exchanges. The issue is
akin to that of reverse or forward chronology in a Curriculum Vitae.
Yasha
