Re: OT: Top Posting

On 5/15/24 10:50, Nicolas George wrote: Cindy Sue Causey (12024-05-15): PS Afterthought is that email signatures are another of that widely accepted netiquette set of standards. You can add the “Re: ” to that list. It is the sequence of four octets 0x52, 0x65, 0x3a, 0x20, and nothing else.

Re: OT: Top Posting

On 5/15/24 6:46 AM, Cindy Sue Causey wrote: . . . No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent that can. There are dozens of

Re: OT: Top Posting

Since my request started this offtopic subthread I hope I can put it to rest. Yes I requested to not toppost. I asked politely, and I added pertinent response on topic. I do not claim to be right or wrong about this. I prefer interleaved style for reason. Everyone on this list heard all arguments

Re: OT: Top Posting

Cindy Sue Causey (12024-05-15): > PS Afterthought is that email signatures are another of that widely > accepted netiquette set of standards. You can add the “Re: ” to that list. It is the sequence of four octets 0x52, 0x65, 0x3a, 0x20, and nothing else. The MUAs who write “RE: ” are wrong.

Re: OT: Top Posting

On 5/15/24 10:06, Nicolas George wrote: Cindy Sue Causey (12024-05-15): Best as I was able to discern from the Net [0], 72 characters is the magic number for line length because 4 extra characters are added to both ends when e.g. git processes submissions. Makes good common sense to me. Git

Re: OT: Top Posting

On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 09:46:08AM -0400, Cindy Sue Causey wrote: > Best as I was able to discern from the Net [0], 72 characters is the > magic number for line length because 4 extra characters are added to > both ends when e.g. git processes submissions. Makes good common sense > to me. > > PS

Re: OT: Top Posting

-Original Message- From: Greg Wooledge To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: OT: Top Posting Date: 05/14/24 13:41:17 On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote: > how many times has this top post crap been dug up > don't y'all have any thing

Re: OT: Top Posting

Cindy Sue Causey (12024-05-15): > Best as I was able to discern from the Net [0], 72 characters is the > magic number for line length because 4 extra characters are added to > both ends when e.g. git processes submissions. Makes good common sense > to me. Git is an order of magnitude younger than

Re: OT: Top Posting

-Original Message- From: gene heskett To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: OT: Top Posting Date: 05/14/24 10:54:50 On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote: Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing

Markup in mail messages (was: Re: OT: Top Posting)

On 15/05/2024 02:32, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:16:20PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it. [...] The only sensible interpretation I can come up with for why these asterisks were added is that they're being placed

Re: OT: Top Posting

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 6:05 PM Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 2:40 PM Richard wrote: > >> You really must think of yourself as being the epitome of human creation. >> I don't see any use in continuing this nonsense. If you don't have anything >> relevant to say, this case

Re: OT: Top Posting

On Tue, 14 May 2024, Andy Smith wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote: >> don't y'all have any thing better to do > > You must be new here. sorta i've only been using versions of linux since the early 90's :) downloaded it from an archie

Re: OT: Top Posting

Hello, On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote: > don't y'all have any thing better to do You must be new here. Get used to reading with a "mark thread read" key in your MUA of choice, is my best advice. Thanks, Andy -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS

Re: OT: Top Posting

Greg Wooledge wrote: > In this particular instance, we've got a person from the second > culture who seems to have no idea that other cultures exist, or that > a mailing list might not adhere to their own expectations. This > person is acting belligerantly, and will not listen to gentle >

Re: OT: Top Posting

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:16:20PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it. I can't be sure where they're coming from exactly, but every once in a while I see messages on debian-user, bug-bash or help-bash which have extra asterisk characters

Re: OT: Top Posting

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 2:40 PM Richard wrote: > You really must think of yourself as being the epitome of human creation. > I don't see any use in continuing this nonsense. If you don't have anything > relevant to say, this case is closed for me. > Who are you talking about? There are two

Re: OT: Top Posting

well, speaking personally, I can respect both sides. I use a screen reader. Having to wade through loads of text, for a conversational flow, especially when not edited is far from productive for me personally. it is much better to have a top post, for me personally, because I have no issues

Re: OT: Top Posting

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote: > how many times has this top post crap been dug up > don't y'all have any thing better to do > i know > how about some real debian issues > Hi, Have a quick look at the Debian-user FAQ posted each month and the Debian

Re: OT: Top Posting

Greg Wooledge (12024-05-14): > Usenet news. For people in this culture, there is a well-defined set > of "netiquette" rules -- plain text messages, inline quoting with "> " > citation characters, lines limited to ~72 characters, etc. I slightly disagree with this wording: you make it sound like

Re: OT: Top Posting

On 5/14/24 10:41 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote: We have a clash of two cultures here. More than just *nix vs. M$. In business communications by email, the norm is to quote the *entire* thread, every time, without paring anything down, purely for the sake of CYA. As such, top-posting is the only

Re: OT: Top Posting

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote: > how many times has this top post crap been dug up > don't y'all have any thing better to do It's never going to stop. We have a clash of two cultures here. The first culture are Unix users who grew up with Internet email

Re: OT: Top Posting

how many times has this top post crap been dug up don't y'all have any thing better to do i know how about some real debian issues

Re: OT: Top Posting (was: Dovecot correct ownership for logs)

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 04:08:19PM +0200, Richard wrote: > Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's not > standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's called a > setting. Most people prefer inline quoting around here (I know I do). That's because

Re: OT: Top Posting

You really must think of yourself as being the epitome of human creation. I don't see any use in continuing this nonsense. If you don't have anything relevant to say, this case is closed for me. Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 16:55 Uhr schrieb gene heskett : > On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote: > > Just

Re: OT: Top Posting

On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote: Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's called a setting. No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor to put your reply after the

Re: OT: Top Posting (was: Dovecot correct ownership for logs)

Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's called a setting. Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett < loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>: > Hi Richard, > > Richard writes: > > > "Top

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

El mié., 18 de sep. de 2019 a la(s) 20:02, Fran Torres (frantorresgall...@gmail.com) escribió: > > Buenas, > > el problema del bottom posting, es que cuando necesitas encontrar una > solución x a un problema z de una forma rápida y eficiente (aquí > también entra la accesibilidad), el bottom

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

El mié., 18 de sep. de 2019 a la(s) 16:38, juan (juansanti...@riseup.net) escribió: > > > El 18/9/19 a las 18:10, Felix Perez escribió: > > El mié., 21 de ago. de 2019 a la(s) 13:55, juan > > (juansanti...@riseup.net) escribió: > >> No sabía que en esta lista hay un regla anti top-postng por eso

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

El 18/9/19 a las 18:10, Felix Perez escribió: El mié., 21 de ago. de 2019 a la(s) 13:55, juan (juansanti...@riseup.net) escribió: No sabía que en esta lista hay un regla anti top-postng por eso lo hacía siempre, para mi es la forma natural de responder para mi es muy fácil seguir un hilo si

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

El jue., 22 de ago. de 2019 a la(s) 07:17, Debian (javier.debian.bb...@gmail.com) escribió: > > Sí. > Nosotros, los propios usuarios, con un acuerdo, podemos modificar las > normas. > Son normas de convivencia, no leyes escritas en piedra bajadas desde lo > alto. > > Lo que habla Fran, invidente,

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

El mié., 21 de ago. de 2019 a la(s) 13:55, juan (juansanti...@riseup.net) escribió: > > No sabía que en esta lista hay un regla anti top-postng por eso lo hacía > siempre, para mi es la forma natural de responder para mi es muy fácil seguir > un hilo si se que tengo que hacerlo de abajo a

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 6:40 PM Jaime Casanova wrote: > > Sin embargo, el hacerlo así no es una cuestión de debian por ejemplo > en el rfc 1855 (https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt) se incluye este > párrafo: > """ > - Be brief without being overly terse. When replying to a message, >

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 10:39 AM Paynalton wrote: > > En Debian siempre ha imperado la democracia y, además de ser la mayor base > tecnológica de nuestros tiempos, se ha convertido en un ejemplo de lo que una > organización democrática bien organizada puede lograr. > De hecho, aunque así lo

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

El 29/8/19 a las 18:26, Paynalton escribió: El jue., 22 ago. 2019 a las 6:17, Debian (>) escribió: Sí. Nosotros, los propios usuarios, con un acuerdo, podemos modificar las normas. Son normas de convivencia, no leyes escritas en piedra

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

El jue., 22 ago. 2019 a las 6:17, Debian () escribió: > Sí. > Nosotros, los propios usuarios, con un acuerdo, podemos modificar las > normas. > Son normas de convivencia, no leyes escritas en piedra bajadas desde lo > alto. > > Lo que habla Fran, invidente, es algo que debe incorporarse en las >

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

Sí. Nosotros, los propios usuarios, con un acuerdo, podemos modificar las normas. Son normas de convivencia, no leyes escritas en piedra bajadas desde lo alto. Lo que habla Fran, invidente, es algo que debe incorporarse en las normas. No se me había pasado siquiera por la mente. Podemos

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

e se fueron dando en el tiempo que condujeron a la solución > final, si la hubo. > > > |¿por que lo hago? Porque no respondo a nadie en particular sino tema > del hilo que está bastante esparramado y si alguien no conoce el hilo y > quiere ver antecedentes puede buscar por el tículo.

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

a nadie en particular sino tema del hilo que está bastante esparramado y si alguien no conoce el hilo y quiere ver antecedentes puede buscar por el tículo. | Por supuesto, peeero... Lo ideal es que un hilo se cierre, modificando el "Asunto", agregando al final la palabra "solucionado&quo

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

lar sino tema >> del hilo que está bastante esparramado y si alguien no conoce el hilo y >> quiere ver antecedentes puede buscar por el tículo. >> | >> > > Por supuesto, peeero... > Lo ideal es que un hilo se cierre, modificando el "Asunto", agregando al > f

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

"Asunto", agregando al final la palabra "solucionado", así: Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting - [SOLUCIONADO] |Y la respuesta directa a un ||usuario||creo que la mayoría la ||consideramos||improcedente, ||creo que mailman pude bloquear esta posibilidad siempre que los corr

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

|No sabía que en esta lista hay un regla anti top-postng por eso lo hacía siempre, para mi es la forma natural de responder para mi es muy fácil seguir un hilo si se que tengo que hacerlo de abajo a arriba, pero lo más importante es que nos pongamos de acuerdo, ya que el verdadero desbarajuste

Re: OT Top-posting y Bottom Posting

El 21/8/19 a las 12:38, Paynalton escribió: Hola a todos. En una sociedad monárquica, la ley refleja la voluntad del soberano, estando los súbditos que aceptan su autoridad a obedecer la ley para mantener el orden establecido por el monarca. En una sociedad democrática, al no existir un

Re: (OT) Top Posting (was Re: Gimp Babl too old)

Kenneth Parker writes: > I have a special issue: Using Gmail on a Phone or Tablet (I have > both). Both of those devices lack a proper keyboard. That makes them unsuitable for composing anything but very short messages, and wholly unsuitable for editing text. > Seriously, how do others of you

Re: (OT) Top Posting (was Re: Gimp Babl too old)

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 6:17 AM, Kenneth Parker wrote: > Seriously, how do others of you deal with navigating this Debian List on > Android, while being a "Good Netizen"? Personally I don't. A phone is a horrible tool for composing texts and is nowhere near a replacement for a computer. Using an

Re: [OT] top-posting (was: unlisted mirrors & non-gui installation)

Hi. On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:31:27 -0300 Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote: > On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 23:16:03 +0300 > Reco wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > Please do not top post. And please do not send html e-mails to the list. > > > > On Tue,

Re: [OT] top posting

On 17/01/2008, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: According to TFA, the events in question happened in Essex, Suffolk, and Middlesex Counties of colonial Massachusetts, which are in the United States, not Israel. You have me misplaced. Although it's been snipped out by now,

Re: [OT] top posting

Andrew Sackville-West wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:58:09AM -0600, Kent West wrote: Ron Johnson wrote: Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Two. No, seven! Arg. You made me lose count!

Re: [OT] top posting

On 17/01/2008, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM, Dotan Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must

Re: [OT] top posting

On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 05:59 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Andrew Sackville-West wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:58:09AM -0600, Kent West wrote: Ron Johnson wrote: Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on

Re: [OT] top posting

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/17/08 12:46, Dotan Cohen wrote: On 17/01/2008, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM, Dotan Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If ducks float, they must be made of wood

Re: [OT] top posting

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 23:14, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: [snip] If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. The sad

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:55:15AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: ... It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 17:37:16 +1100, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: ... It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole movie. and apparently, one can recover from

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:02:07 +0100 (CET) s. keeling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, why don't your lines wrap at ca. 80 chars? Missed that lesson? Huh? I set Claws to wrap at 70. I thought it would do that automatically before sending the message... Fixed. --D. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tuesday 15 January 2008 05:34:28 Andrew Sackville-West wrote: I always hated that STOP AHEAD thing. I always figured if you are close enough to the words that it mattered which one you drove over first, you aren't looking far enough up the road. And if you are following too closely to read

Re: [OT] top posting

On 16/01/2008, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This text in English or Dutch. On that page, right under the $Revision: 2.4 $, click on the word English. Thanks. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because

Re: [OT] top posting

On 16/01/2008, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like

Re: [OT] top posting

On Jan 16, 2008 12:42 AM, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 01/15/08 23:14, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: [snip] If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:55:15AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: ...

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Paul Johnson wrote: On Jan 16, 2008 12:42 AM, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 01/15/08 23:14, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: [snip] If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must

Re: [OT] top posting

On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work

Re: [OT] top posting

On 15 Jan, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 09:23:39PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/15/08 19:24, s. keeling wrote: Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 01/15/08 17:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: The problem, the oft-overlooked side comment made by one of the

Re: [OT] top posting

Given that you're in the country that invented the witch-hunt, that's not much surprise. I wasn't aware that he was from Babylonia! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Antiquity -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:57:51AM +0100, Ulrich Schweitzer wrote: On Tuesday 15 January 2008 05:34:28 Andrew Sackville-West wrote: I always hated that STOP AHEAD thing. I always figured if you are close enough to the words that it mattered which one you drove over first, you aren't

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:56:28AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:55:15AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:56:28AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:55:15AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:53:34PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: [snip] Well, now you're just contradicting. I'd tell you why that's not true but there's a bunch of mean looking guys at my door. I figure it's either the Spanish Inquisition or the Business Software Alliance. (Is there much

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:07:41AM +0100, Dan H wrote: Again: There is NO NEED to scroll through redundant stuff! You need to EDIT the irrelevant stuff away! What's so hard to understand about this? Do you notice that this posting, although it is deep in an ongoing thread, covers barely

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:29:49PM +1100, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 04:17:42PM -0900, Ken Irving wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:00:28PM +1100, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:49:52PM -0900, Ken Irving wrote: In fact, it's a social convention, a matter of

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 09:23:39PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 19:24, s. keeling wrote: Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 01/15/08 17:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: The problem, the oft-overlooked side comment made by one of the

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:53:34PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: [snip] Well, now you're just contradicting. I'd tell you why that's not true but there's a bunch of mean looking guys at my door. I figure it's either the Spanish Inquisition

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 05:12:07PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:53:34PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: [snip] Well, now you're just contradicting. I'd tell you why that's not true but there's a bunch of mean

Re: [OT] top posting

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:07:08 -0600 Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/14/08 18:58, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:25:14PM -0800, Raquel wrote: On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:52:04 +1100 Alex Samad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Re: [OT] top posting

On Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM, Dotan Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's

Re: [OT] top posting

Paul Johnson wrote: On Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM, Dotan Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of wood and therefore, she'll

Re: [OT] top posting

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:46:38 +1300 Chris Bannister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Its also to recommended to set the line wrap variable in your editor to about 72 or so. I don't know how to set that in Slypheed Claws. Configuration / Preferences / Compose / Wrapping Chris. Celejar --

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 05:12:07PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:53:34PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: [snip] Well, now you're just contradicting. I'd tell

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Paul Johnson wrote: On Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM, Dotan Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be

Re: [OT] top posting

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:43:23PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 05:12:07PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:53:34PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote:

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:58:06 +1100 Alex Samad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All I am trying to point out is for a normal user ( ie somebody who is subscribed to the list), when a thread starts, you read them in date/time order as them come in, why seems illogical to have to scroll through stuff

Re: [OT] top posting

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:49:52 -0900 Ken Irving [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In fact, it's a social convention, a matter of etiquette. The practice varies, and some lists work the other way, but on this and many lists the convention is to top post Huh? I don't think so, but even if what you say is

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:58:46 +1100 Alex Samad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:25:14PM -0800, Raquel wrote: Then the people posting are not trimming their posts as they should. or taken to the extreme, why not remove all the original post! No, it's best to always trim

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:57:04 +1100 Alex Samad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [flame on] but we do read chronologically (in date order) and I for one hate having to go 3 pages down to read the answer to the previous email (in a threaded news reader!). That's why you properly clip the message you're

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:52:04 +1100 Alex Samad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: my mail reader sort my mail in date order and links together all the threaded emails. I read them in date/time order, if I follow a thread from begging to end, then all i should have to do is read the top posts, but if

Re: [OT] top posting

All I am trying to point out is for a normal user ( ie somebody who is subscribed to the list), when a thread starts, you read them in date/time order as them come in, why seems illogical to have to scroll through stuff that you have just read. blimey ... what's next folks, arguing

Re: [OT] top posting

Ron Johnson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/14/08 16:52, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 04:13:22PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/14/08 15:57, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 10:32:53AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/14/08 10:21, Ebanutiy

Re: [OT] top posting

Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Ron Johnson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/14/08 16:52, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 04:13:22PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/14/08 15:57, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 10:32:53AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On

Re: [OT] top posting

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 06:36, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: [snip] I always start at the last page and write upwards so my diary becomes illegible to all, including me, in order to attempt to have time move backwards. At my age that become

Re: [OT] top posting

Ron Johnson wrote: Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Two. No, seven! Arg. You made me lose count! -- Kent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:58:09AM -0600, Kent West wrote: Ron Johnson wrote: Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Two. No, seven! Arg. You made me lose count! oh come on. Everyone

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 09:24:52AM +, I.E.Broadbent wrote: blimey ... what's next folks, arguing Gulliver-style about which end of the egg to open? oh please. Don't start that old flame-war again! Everyone knows it's the small end. ... Can we kill this OT subject now please?

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:28:15AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 06:36, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: [snip] I always start at the last page and write upwards so my diary becomes illegible to all, including me, in

Re: [OT] top posting

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 16:46, Alex Samad wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:28:15AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/15/08 06:36, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: [snip] I always start at the last page and write upwards so my diary becomes

Re: [OT] top posting

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 04:57:15PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/15/08 16:46, Alex Samad wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:28:15AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head

Re: [OT] top posting

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 17:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 04:57:15PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/15/08 16:46, Alex Samad wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:28:15AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: Exotic mathematics without a grounding

Re: [OT] top posting

On Jan 14, 2008, at 5:40 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: This is a bottom-posting list, like every other list that has such a rule. I've never heard of a list that specifically _prefers_ top posting. If there is such a list, I doubt that it would be of a very technical nature. While not technically a

Re: [OT] top posting

Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Jan 14, 2008 6:43 PM, s. keeling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe (maybe wrongly ) that this mailing list is a non top-posting list, I try and conform. You're correct. List policy prefers snip irrelevancies and bottom post. Where are you

Re: [OT] top posting

Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Jan 14, 2008 1:03 PM, Dotan Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You should read this: http://what-is-what.com/what_is/top_posting.html I prefer http://learn.to/quote for that; the URL you mention only Tried that lately? Goes to The Webalias Network. --

Re: [OT] top posting

On Jan 15, 2008 4:20 PM, David Brodbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 14, 2008, at 5:40 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: This is a bottom-posting list, like every other list that has such a rule. I've never heard of a list that specifically _prefers_ top posting. If there is such a list, I doubt

Re: [OT] top posting

Dan H [EMAIL PROTECTED]: No, it's best to always trim the original to the extent that it still contains the relevant context for your reply. Half a dozen lines is usually enough. Of course I've got about 15 years of Usenet experience under my belt. That teaches discipline! So, why

  1   2   >