subject:"Top posting"

top-posting 'condescending asshats' (to use Ryan Coleman's description of himself)

2011-08-03 Thread Robert Bonomi

 Subject: Re: printing to Kyocera FS-1030D
 From: Ryan Coleman edi...@d3photography.com
 Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:22:51 -0500

 Screw off.

I'd suggest that you take your own advice', except for the fact that you 
probably don't know *how*.

Top posting is actually a default in the mail software 
 community.

FALSE TO FACT.

top posting was _universally_ frowned upon in the early days of email.
It became 'common', albeit *NOT* preferred/desirable, when Microsoft 
introduced that botch in _their_ e-mail client, and the vast majority of 
their users didn't know any better.

There are sound 'human factors' reasons why bottom-posting is preferable in
most situations.

*ANY* situation where the elapsed time between messages is longer than the
recipient's ability to retain the 'frame of reference' (i.e., the previous
message) in memory, it _is_ harder for the recipient of the message to follow
top-posted content than interleaved/bottom-posted.  They _do_ have to scan
back-and-forth to find out (first) _what_ is being talked about,and (then)
what the response is.

Top posting _can_ be appropriate in situations where it is *KNOWN* that 
eall_ parties will receive, and _read_,  the 'reply' in a 'near-immediate'
time-frame relative to when the original was sent.

Those who fail to recognize this inherent _FACT_ of all 'non-local'
store-and-forward communications systems -- where the sender has _NO_ idea 
of 'how soon' the recipient will read the message, or what they may have 
been doing in the mean time -- *are* being 'inconsiderate' to their readers.
Those who _insist_ on doing it, despite attempts at education, are *arrogant*,
inconsiderate, ignoramuses.

And I will always do it.

No doubt.  Marking you as an arrogant, and *deliberately* inconsiderate, 
asshat.

 More annoying: Extra spaces and not removing the cruff from the bottom of 
 emails. And condescending asshats.

I see you believe in the double-standard of do as I say, not as I do given 
that you left in over 60 lines of material that was entirely irrelevant to 
your empty-headed posturing. 

Note: The _entire_ prior conent is left intact here, to expressly document 
the truth of the above statement.

 On Aug 3, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote:

  Pierre, please do not 'top post' replies -- it makes the 'logic' of the 
  message hard to follow,  to wit:

  A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.

  Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

  A: Top-posting.

  Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

  See also _RFC 1855_ for the closest thing to an 'official' stance on 
  the matter.

  Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:10:03 -0400 From: Pierre-Luc Drouin 
  pldro...@pldrouin.net To: Chris Whitehouse cwhi...@onetel.com Cc: 
  User Questions freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: printing 
  to Kyocera FS-1030D

  Hi,

  I would install CUPS and use the PPD file recommended on 
  openprinting.org
  (http://www.openprinting.org/printer/Kyocera/Kyocera-FS-1030D).

  This is -guaranteed- to be *ineffective*.

  Apparently you missed the mention in the OP's original message that the 
  printer is running in 'PCL' emulation mode, and that he _cannot_ change 
  that.

  Cheers, Pierre-Luc

  On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Chris Whitehouse cwhi...@onetel.com 
  wrote:
  Hi,

  before I use up too many trees experimenting, could some kind soul 
  tell me how I can get OpenOffice to print to this printer. This is 
  the first time I have tried to get anything printed from FreeBSD.

  I'm following the handbook. I think the basic setup is ok, I can get 
  text printed using eg
  # lptest 20 5 | lpr -Plp

  If I try to print the postscript program given in the handbook
  %!PS
  100 100 moveto 300 300 lineto stroke
  310 310 moveto /Helvetica findfont 12 scalefont setfont
  (Is this thing working?) show
  showpage

  # cat ps-file |lpr -Plp

  I get the whole text of the file not just Is this thing working?.

  The printer has various emulations, it is set to PCL 6 and I can't 
  change it
  (not my printer)

  Printing from OpenOffice just produces screeds of garbage, starting 
  with %!PS so I presume the text of the postscript that OO has 
  produced.

  The bit I'm stuck on is in section 9.4.1.3 Simulating PostScript on 
  Non PostScript Printers (which I presume is what I need), 
  specifically setting the device. gs -h doesn't show this printer or 
  any Kyocera printer. So either what should I set Device to, or how do 
  I get ghostscript to know about this printer?

  I'm using 8.1-RELEASE, openoffice.org-3.2.1, ghostscript8-8.71_6

  thanks

  Chris

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: top-posting 'condescending asshats' (to use Ryan Coleman's description of himself)

2011-08-03 Thread Jon Radel



On 8/3/11 3:01 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote:


*ANY* situation where the elapsed time between messages is longer than the
recipient's ability to retain the 'frame of reference' (i.e., the previous
message) in memory, it _is_ harder for the recipient of the message to follow
top-posted content than interleaved/bottom-posted.  They _do_ have to scan
back-and-forth to find out (first) _what_ is being talked about,and (then)
what the response is.


But you can learn so very many interesting things if you read down to 
the part that has the internal discussion about what they wish to tell 
you, which they completely loose track of by they time they send you a 
nice sanitized statement way up top.   ;-)


--Jon Radel
j...@radel.com
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Top Posting Mania [was Re: FreeBSD 7.O compiled code is very slow]

2009-02-22 Thread Doug Lee

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 06:50:04PM +1100, Ian Smith wrote:
 On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
  On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Kailash Kailash wrote:

Woj, I'm really surprised that you, of all people, seem lately to have
been converted to the Micro$oft Outlock-trained style of top-posting,
including tail-quoting all sorts irrelevant and repeated trailers etc,
after years of your (almost too- :) concise postings.
   
   well, sorry, but i don't use M$ Outlock
 
 That's more like it! :)

I don't either, but I will provide a different data point:  Blind
listers, myself included, must generally read through posts
sequentially, as it is usually trickier to skip reliably through
quotes to the new material when using synthesized speech to read an
email.  We therefore favor top posting as a rule, though some of us
try to adhere to a particular list's preferences. :-)

For my part, I got way tired of sifting through masses of quotes and
requotes and finally threw a little Perl script in as a Mutt display
filter:  Anyone who uses  to quote lines is now my friend because
my filter removes those, and I only see them on demand by opening the
body of the message from Mutt's attachment list.  Those who use other
quoting techniques still cause me some anguish. :)

So in summary, I hope people quote consistently, and I'll post at
whichever end seems most popular per list.  At least when I remember
to do so...


-- 
Doug Lee d...@dlee.orghttp://www.dlee.org
SSB BART Group   doug@ssbbartgroup.com   http://www.ssbbartgroup.com
When your best-laid plans have turned to dust, vacuum!
- Whoopi Goldberg 
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Top Posting Mania [was Re: FreeBSD 7.O compiled code is very slow]

2009-02-22 Thread Chad Perrin

On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 02:52:34PM -0500, Doug Lee wrote:
 
 I don't either, but I will provide a different data point:  Blind
 listers, myself included, must generally read through posts
 sequentially, as it is usually trickier to skip reliably through
 quotes to the new material when using synthesized speech to read an
 email.  We therefore favor top posting as a rule, though some of us
 try to adhere to a particular list's preferences. :-)

This is why one should trim quotes -- so there's just enough there to
provide the needed context, rather than a lengthy record of an entire
conversation.  It may be surprising to you, but those of us who can see
also sometimes find it annoying to have six thousand words of repetitive
quotes of material that is currently irrelevant stacked up at either the
top *or* the bottom of the email.


 
 For my part, I got way tired of sifting through masses of quotes and
 requotes and finally threw a little Perl script in as a Mutt display
 filter:  Anyone who uses  to quote lines is now my friend because
 my filter removes those, and I only see them on demand by opening the
 body of the message from Mutt's attachment list.  Those who use other
 quoting techniques still cause me some anguish. :)

That's a pretty good idea.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
Quoth Scott McNealy: Microsoft is now talking about the digital nervous
system.  I guess I would be nervous if my system was built on their
technology too.


pgpDnaT2Leb6G.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top Posting Mania [was Re: FreeBSD 7.O compiled code is very slow]

2009-02-19 Thread GESBBB

 From: Ian Smith smi...@nimnet.asn.au

[snip]
 
 Woj, I'm really surprised that you, of all people, seem lately to have 
 been converted to the Micro$oft Outlock-trained style of top-posting, 
 including tail-quoting all sorts irrelevant and repeated trailers etc, 
 after years of your (almost too- :) concise postings.
 
 This list is getting very hard to follow as a digest anymore, when half 
 of it or more is re-re-repeated overtailquoting of irrelevant trivia.  
 Please come back from the dark side ..

1) MS Outlook is not the only MUA that defaults to 'TOP POSTING'.

2) It is configurable in the newer versions

3) The lack of effort by many posters to trim a message prior to sending is 
equally annoying.

4) The insertion of legally unenforceable disclaimers, etc. is another big 
waste of space.

5) The use of HTML mail in a mail forum is absurd; however, it is commonly done 
(GMail).

6) One of my 'Pet Peeves: Morons who change a thread's subject rather than 
start a new one.

-- 
Jerry
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Top Posting Mania [was Re: FreeBSD 7.O compiled code is very slow]

2009-02-19 Thread Wojciech Puchar


5) The use of HTML mail in a mail forum is absurd; however, it is commonly done 
(GMail).

this is a problem - as GMail and similar things itself.


6) One of my 'Pet Peeves: Morons who change a thread's subject rather than 
start a new one.

was me sometimes by accident, but i do care now not doing this.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Top Posting Mania [was Re: FreeBSD 7.O compiled code is very slow]

2009-02-19 Thread Mel

On Thursday 19 February 2009 05:06:15 GESBBB wrote:

 4) The insertion of legally unenforceable disclaimers, etc. is another big
 waste of space.

And not always under the control of sender, through the creative use of 
outgoing mailfilters.

-- 
Mel

Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules
and never get to the software part.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Top Posting Mania [was Re: FreeBSD 7.O compiled code is very slow]

2009-02-18 Thread Wojciech Puchar


  On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Kailash Kailash wrote:

Woj, I'm really surprised that you, of all people, seem lately to have
been converted to the Micro$oft Outlock-trained style of top-posting,
including tail-quoting all sorts irrelevant and repeated trailers etc,
after years of your (almost too- :) concise postings.


well, sorry, but i don't use M$ Outlock
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: Top Posting Mania [was Re: FreeBSD 7.O compiled code is very slow]

2009-02-18 Thread Ian Smith

On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
 On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Kailash Kailash wrote:
   
   Woj, I'm really surprised that you, of all people, seem lately to have
   been converted to the Micro$oft Outlock-trained style of top-posting,
   including tail-quoting all sorts irrelevant and repeated trailers etc,
   after years of your (almost too- :) concise postings.
  
  well, sorry, but i don't use M$ Outlock

That's more like it! :)

cheers, Ian
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-26 Thread Gerard Seibert

 On November 25, 2007 at 09:49PM Giorgos Keramidas wrote:

[ snip ]

 The footnote was easy to understand after a quick Wikipedia search:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting#Top-posting
 
 Quoting the text (so list members don't have to actually repeat the
 search):
 
 Some maintain that top-posting is _never_ appropriate, and refer to
 it jokingly as the TOFU method (from the German text oben,
 fullquote unten, sometimes translated text over, fullquote
 under) [...]
 
 Nice one.  I had not heard of TOFU posting before :)

There are some more interesting meaning here:


http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?Acronym=tofuFind=findstring=exact


-- 
Gerard
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-25 Thread Chad Perrin

On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 02:52:06PM +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
 
 It should be easy in mailing-lists to block mails of top-posters.

It would also probably be prone to false positive errors.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
McCloctnick the Lucid: The first rule of magic is simple. Don't waste your
time waving your hands and hopping when a rock or a club will do.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-25 Thread Chad Perrin

On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:48:38AM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
 On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:31:51 -0500, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
  
  We have adults who can't be bothered to tell the difference 
  between lose and loose in writing. Wonderful things encouraged by people 
  justifying their lazy writing styles.
  
 This might be slightly unfair.
 
 A large proportion of the population has *never* been able to spell correctly
 or to use proper grammar.  A difference between now, and a few years ago, is
 that we are more often encountering their expressions in a written form, as
 they, too, gain access to the Internet.

I think it's kind of a chicken-and-egg problem: we don't really know for
sure whether TOFU[1] posting spurred much of the rise of illiteracy or
the increase of relative illiteracy on the Internet led to an increase in
TOFU posting.  Which came first?

Ultimately, I think greater frequency of TOFU posting and a reduced
average ability to order one's thoughts to compose meaningful discourse
each contribute to the other.

 
 And an insistence on grammatical and spelling correctness is its own form of
 elitism.

Is it?  In my case, it tends to be a couple of things, neither of which
is particularly elitist as far as I can tell:

  1. an attempt to help others learn how to think more clearly and
  express themselves more precisely

  2. an easy way to filter those who do not think very clearly so I can
  spend more of my time on those who do, since better grammar and
  spelling (along with certain other communication skills) tends to be
  indicative of clearer thought

I won't ignore someone who displays appalling lack of writing capabilities
just because of poor spelling or grammar.  I sometimes need to cut down
on how much stuff gets read in a given day, so I have time to do
something with the information I get from my reading, and when the need
is great enough it's usually the people who don't communicate worth a
damn that get cut first.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Kent Beck: I always knew that one day Smalltalk would replace Java.  I
just didn't know it would be called Ruby.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-25 Thread Chad Perrin

On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 10:22:50AM +1300, Brent Jones wrote:

I find that top-posting really makes it difficult to follow the flow of a
discussion.  I especially find it difficult when someone engages in TOFU
[1] posting, because when I try to check context there's a gawdawful
lengthy blob of stuff, of which usually only a tiny bit is context.
Please trim and post in context.


 
 I for one prefer top posting, as usually I have read a particular thread
 enough times that I like to cut to the chase and read the new input
 without having to scroll down, sometimes navigating an endless nesting
 of   For me, reading through top posted replies saves time and
 effort.  If I happened to miss something in the conversation I can
 scroll down to find it.

I'm sure someone does, but I don't.


 
 Anyone else feel the same?

[1]: TOFU = Text Over, Fullquote Under; a term for the most common form
of top posting

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Baltasar Gracian: A wise man gets more from his enemies than a fool from
his friends.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-25 Thread Chad Perrin

On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 06:56:15PM -0700, Chad Perrin wrote:
 
 I think it's kind of a chicken-and-egg problem: we don't really know for
 sure whether TOFU[1] posting spurred much of the rise of illiteracy or
 the increase of relative illiteracy on the Internet led to an increase in
 TOFU posting.  Which came first?

I forgot to include the footnote about TOFU in the preceding message.  It
would have looked something like this:

[1]: TOFU = Text Over, Fullquote Under; the most common format of top
posted replies

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
MacUser, Nov. 1990: There comes a time in the history of any project when
it becomes necessary to shoot the engineers and begin production.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-25 Thread Giorgos Keramidas

On 2007-11-25 19:01, Chad Perrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 06:56:15PM -0700, Chad Perrin wrote:
 
  I think it's kind of a chicken-and-egg problem: we don't really know for
  sure whether TOFU[1] posting spurred much of the rise of illiteracy or
  the increase of relative illiteracy on the Internet led to an increase in
  TOFU posting.  Which came first?

 I forgot to include the footnote about TOFU in the preceding message.  It
 would have looked something like this:

 [1]: TOFU = Text Over, Fullquote Under; the most common format of top
 posted replies

The footnote was easy to understand after a quick Wikipedia search:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting#Top-posting

Quoting the text (so list members don't have to actually repeat the
search):

Some maintain that top-posting is _never_ appropriate, and refer to
it jokingly as the TOFU method (from the German text oben,
fullquote unten, sometimes translated text over, fullquote
under) [...]

Nice one.  I had not heard of TOFU posting before :)

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-25 Thread Erich Dollansky


Hi,

Brent Jones wrote:

Sorry if this is a bit off topic for this list, but it seem to be a
comment that comes up very regularly; please don't top post...


at least, you make me understand what this means.

Yes, it is stupid to avoid top posting as they save a lot of time as 
long as it is still clear how it is connected to the original message.


I for one prefer top posting, as usually I have read a particular thread
enough times that I like to cut to the chase and read the new input
without having to scroll down, sometimes navigating an endless nesting


Most of the time, it is a waste to keep the parts of the original 
message which is not referred to in the answer.



Anyone else feel the same?


Oh yes!

Erich
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-24 Thread Giorgos Keramidas

On 2007-11-23 21:58, David Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 22, 2007, at 9:10 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
 Understood from that perspective, perhaps you can see why people
 might dislike top posting.

 Many here (and elsewhere) will not reply to a top-poster.

I am one of these people.

If I see a top-posted message -- totally incomprehensible, full of
errors, misformattings, and other annoying bits, including mutilated
quotes with completely messed up quoting, and semi-randomly wrapped text
-- then it instantly rings a very important bell:

The author of this message does not care enough to put some effort into
writing a properly formatted, readable reply.  If he doesn't care enough
to make his message readable, do you really want to spend the effort to
_read_ it?

The answer is, surprisingly often, No, I don't think I want to do that.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-23 Thread Bart Silverstrim




David Benfell wrote:

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:31:51 -0500, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
We have adults who can't be bothered to tell the difference 
between lose and loose in writing. Wonderful things encouraged by people 
justifying their lazy writing styles.



This might be slightly unfair.

A large proportion of the population has *never* been able to spell correctly
or to use proper grammar.  


has never been able to is not a valid excuse in my book when it comes 
to writing without a significant number of qualifications.  The vast 
number of people I see misusing common words are fully educated and are 
very able to use most of the other words in the same message just fine, 
yet never stop to fix proper usage of loose vs. lose.


I'm not saying writing must be perfect, and I'm well aware of my own 
grammar shortcomings and I fully understand typos and mistakes.  But 
there are also trends that I run into ALL THE TIME that are simply a 
case of people not taking a bit of care.



A difference between now, and a few years ago, is
that we are more often encountering their expressions in a written form, as
they, too, gain access to the Internet.


AND they don't care enough to take a few moments to edit or put thought 
into their writing.  That was my point.


We have small businesses in the small town I live in.  Many of them have 
typos in their signs.  Constantly.  Now, if I go to a fast food joint in 
my town and they screw up my drink, bleh, it happens.  I can accept that 
mistakes happen.  But when a place screws up my order three or four 
times in a row, as our local Burger King did, I stop going there. 
Period.  When there are businesses with a mistake on their sign, well, 
maybe it's a plain whoops.  When I see mistakes consistently in their 
signs, I wonder if they really care about their business image, and if 
they're lazy or not willing to take care in their image, would I trust 
that they are careful in doing business as well?  I avoid them.



As a graduate student in communication, I write a lot.  As a teacher of public
speaking, I see grammatical and spelling errors in the outlines my students
turn in.  These errors irritate me, but having also worked in the technology
sector, and having seen memos from my fellow technology workers, prior to
outsourcing and the importing of people who have an excuse, I know my students
are not alone.


There is making mistakes and there is plain I don't care.  The ones 
that make mistakes try not to repeat them.  They care about trying not 
to look like ignoramuses.  If I were to point out that loose and 
lose mean to entirely different things they would make a note not to 
do that again in the future.


The ones I SPECIFICALLY refer to are the latter.  They DON'T CARE. 
These are the ones that treat email as a substitute for instant 
messenger.  They care nothing for crafting messages to deliver a message 
rather than a mental fart.  They are the ones that think communication 
reached a zenith by reading, word for word, a set of PowerPoint slides 
to the assembled napping crowd.



Dyslexia and other learning disabilities that impede mastery of spelling and
grammar may be much more common than is often reported.  Underfunded public
schools don't help.


Yeah, I work in a US public school.  My wife is an English teacher.  She 
has more students than she cares to have claiming, upon having mistakes 
pointed out, I'm just not a good speller.  It's an excuse.  She knows 
what these kids are capable of and quite frankly they are simply not 
being careful, and I'm tired of coddling them and enabling their 
laziness further by dismissing their mistakes as being okay when they 
simply don't put effort into fixing the problem.


It's also an insult to those that do work hard to overcome their 
problems.  I know a couple of dyslexics who spell words rather well 
because they worked to overcome the problem.  How is it fair to ignore 
the ones that just don't want to put effort into doing better?  They 
didn't just passively accept a limitation, they worked at making their 
situation better.  Others do them no favors in just nodding a smiling 
and telling them it's okay to just be sub par when they are capable of 
at least trying to do better.



And an insistence on grammatical and spelling correctness is its own form of
elitism.


No, I'm insisting on not being lazy and passing it off as just the norm. 
 I've clearly acknowledged that I don't expect perfection, and mistakes 
are more than acceptable.  What I DON'T accept is when they are no 
longer mistakes, just a simple I-don't-give-a-damn attitude.  The 
writing is untrimmed, the grammar is sloppy, and the excuse is that it 
saves THEM time and effort.  Quoting isn't trimmed.  No effort is put 
into crafting a message.  Email is turned less into a communication 
medium and more into a very very poor form of instant messaging. 
Messages in the archive consist of non-linear messages piled on top of 
each other

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-23 Thread David Kelly



On Nov 22, 2007, at 9:10 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:

Understood from that perspective, perhaps you can see why people  
might dislike top posting.


When asking a favor of another, a wise man would not offend his  
potential helper. Many here (and elsewhere) will not reply to a top- 
poster. You want some of my time then you had better take the minimal  
effort to phrase and format your communication.


Less effort, actually. A trimmed insert-reply is not only a more  
accurate communication, but faster to create, as well as faster to  
read and comprehend.


--
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-23 Thread David Benfell

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:31:51 -0500, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
 
 We have adults who can't be bothered to tell the difference 
 between lose and loose in writing. Wonderful things encouraged by people 
 justifying their lazy writing styles.
 
This might be slightly unfair.

A large proportion of the population has *never* been able to spell correctly
or to use proper grammar.  A difference between now, and a few years ago, is
that we are more often encountering their expressions in a written form, as
they, too, gain access to the Internet.

As a graduate student in communication, I write a lot.  As a teacher of public
speaking, I see grammatical and spelling errors in the outlines my students
turn in.  These errors irritate me, but having also worked in the technology
sector, and having seen memos from my fellow technology workers, prior to
outsourcing and the importing of people who have an excuse, I know my students
are not alone.

Dyslexia and other learning disabilities that impede mastery of spelling and
grammar may be much more common than is often reported.  Underfunded public
schools don't help.

And an insistence on grammatical and spelling correctness is its own form of
elitism.



-- 
David Benfell, LCP
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Resume available at http://www.parts-unknown.org/
NOTE: I sign all messages with GnuPG (0DD1D1E3).


pgpoYMeSjyMXH.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-23 Thread Bart Silverstrim




Robert Huff wrote:

Bart Silverstrim writes:


 You're right in that top posting is a savings in effort.


I disagree.  It's not a savings, it's a transfer - moves the
work from the poster to the reader.  


Okay, I'll qualify my statement by saying it is a time and effort saver 
for the author only...


-Bart
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-23 Thread Robert Huff

Bart Silverstrim writes:

  You're right in that top posting is a savings in effort.

I disagree.  It's not a savings, it's a transfer - moves the
work from the poster to the reader.  Make that readers, because
/every single reader/ has been imposed on to expend the effort.
Looked at that way, it could be seen as not just lazy and
stupid but outright hostile.


Robert Huff
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-23 Thread Matthias Apitz

El día Friday, November 23, 2007 a las 08:05:59AM -0500, Bill Moran escribió:

 There are three reasons _not_ to top-post and to post inline, trimming
 your response intelligently:
 
 1) Top-posting does not scale up to large, complex emails.  It produces
incomprehensible responses when the conversation requires more than
a yes or no answer.
 2) Stop thinking about yourself and realize that most messages read in
archives long after they were posted.  Top posted messages in archives
are a lot more difficult to parse, and usually require a lot of clicking
around to get back to earlier messages, etc.
 3) RFC-1855 says so.
...

I'm as well participating for *many* years in technical mailing-lists
or USENET and I'm strictly against top-posting. I think this problem
(that people top-post or don't even know that they top-post because they
don't know what top-posting is at all) has something todo with two
phenomena:

- the Internet in the 90es felled into the hands of non-technical
  backgrounded people; ask today someone what is a RFC, for an example;
  Netiquette Guidelines came outdated (for the newcomers) and they don't
  know them or even think, if they know, that they have something todo
  with the plain old days of modem lines and UUCP;

- many of the MUA used by unskilled people are somewhat browser-based
  (OutLook, webmail, ...) and don't support a power-full line editor (like
  vi or emacs) to assemble and/or edit the mail body; the browser just put
  the write-mark above the 1st line of the mail, people write their
  stuff and are to lazy to scroll down, delete parts or whatever; many of
  them don't even know how to configure their MUA to do correct
  nesting with  signs;

The only (week) technical argument in favour of top-post is that
mail delivered to small wire-less devices (like mobile phones, hand
helds) mostly only transfer the 1st 'screen' of such mail via UMTS
or whatever transport layer and only if the reader wants to scroll
down the rest of the mail is aired to the device.

It should be easy in mailing-lists to block mails of top-posters.

matthias

-- 
Matthias Apitz
Manager Technical Support - OCLC PICA GmbH
Gruenwalder Weg 28g - 82041 Oberhaching - Germany
t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211
e [EMAIL PROTECTED] - w http://www.oclcpica.org/ http://www.UnixArea.de/
b http://gurucubano.blogspot.com/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-23 Thread Bill Moran

Brent Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 I for one prefer top posting, as usually I have read a particular thread
 enough times that I like to cut to the chase and read the new input
 without having to scroll down, sometimes navigating an endless nesting
 of   For me, reading through top posted replies saves time and
 effort.  If I happened to miss something in the conversation I can
 scroll down to find it.

There are three reasons _not_ to top-post and to post inline, trimming
your response intelligently:

1) Top-posting does not scale up to large, complex emails.  It produces
   incomprehensible responses when the conversation requires more than
   a yes or no answer.
2) Stop thinking about yourself and realize that most messages read in
   archives long after they were posted.  Top posted messages in archives
   are a lot more difficult to parse, and usually require a lot of clicking
   around to get back to earlier messages, etc.
3) RFC-1855 says so.

Most people who _honestly_ ask this question simply don't have a lot of
experience with online discussions.  Take the advice of people who have
been doing this for years and you look smart.

-- 
Bill Moran
http://www.potentialtech.com
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-23 Thread Peter N. M. Hansteen

Brent Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 I for one prefer top posting, as usually I have read a particular thread

http://www.asciiartfarts.com/20011201.html

HTH, HAND
-- 
Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team
http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.datadok.no/ http://www.nuug.no/
Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic
delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-23 Thread Bart Silverstrim




Brent Jones wrote:

I for one prefer top posting, as usually I have read a particular thread
enough times that I like to cut to the chase and read the new input
without having to scroll down, sometimes navigating an endless nesting
of   For me, reading through top posted replies saves time and
effort.  If I happened to miss something in the conversation I can
scroll down to find it.

Anyone else feel the same?


I don't.

If you're going to top post, trim the cruft.

Archives don't need 10 posts getting gradually larger as you repeat the 
repeat the repeat the repeat...


As I read from top to bottom, if you're referring to something that's 
buried somewhere below headers (that you left in) that are below more 
information, etc., it's a PITA to find what you're talking about in context.


You're right in that top posting is a savings in effort.  It takes 
effort to craft a response, and instead just burp a brain toot to the 
list.  I would suggest looking into Instant Messaging as a better outlet 
for such brain toots.


People constantly bitch about emails being hard to interpret.  Was it 
serious?  Sarcastic?  A joke?  Top posters encourage taking this to the 
next step...they make the message more vague.  What were you referring 
to?  A particular passage?  In general?  What? In your race to save a 
few seconds of actual thought and editing, you make the message more 
vague.  Thanks.



If you don't read the bottom part, why the hell are you quoting it? 
Just to make the archives larger?  So I can refer to it if I need to?? 
 Here's an idea.  Read the old messages.  Your search engine in your 
mail program may speed up a few nanoseconds if you don't have all that 
extra crap repeated a dozen times.


Best part...replying to a 5K message, top posted, just so you can add a 
one-line comment.  WHY?


No wonder email is thought to increase brain rot.  People don't take the 
time to edit or think through thoughts before laying them to the 
virtual paper, and it's at the point where you read something, burp a 
brain fart to the top and resend it while justifying their inability to 
adhere to the reading top-to-bottom that so many have come to accept by 
reading books and articles in a linear fashion as a child as a 
time-saver.  Bigger time-saver for me is to delete messages when they 
come in with that formatting.  We have l337 sp33k because it saves time. 
  U seen it b4, rite?  We have top posting.  We have adults who can't 
be bothered to tell the difference between lose and loose in writing. 
Wonderful things encouraged by people justifying their lazy writing styles.


You make an impression online by your writing.  These shortcuts strike 
me as coming from authors that are too lazy to craft their thoughts into 
something worth presenting...sloppy.  Silly mistakes and typos happen 
but all too often, when coupled with other styling choices they make, 
it's hard to give the benefit of the doubt as to how much they care how 
much credibility they loose by using sloppy expressions of their thoughts.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-22 Thread David Benfell

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 10:22:50 +1300, Brent Jones wrote:
 Sorry if this is a bit off topic for this list, but it seem to be a
 comment that comes up very regularly; please don't top post...
 
 I for one prefer top posting

This has been hashed out on so many technically-oriented lists, that
it almost appears as a troll.

A friend of mine manages, if I recall correctly, to answer this in a
signature block, pointing to a logical discontinuity inherent in placing
an answer prior to the question.

But it gets worse, when some, particularly newbies, reply to a post in
order to start a completely new topic.

And it gets even worse when some of us--particularly the most helpful
ones--are subscribed to numerous technical lists and should review the
context of the communication prior to responding.

So, my response, and I daresay I speak for others, is for you to get
over it.  You should review the entire context of a communication in
understanding it as well.


-- 
David Benfell, LCP
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Resume available at http://www.parts-unknown.org/
NOTE: I sign all messages with GnuPG (0DD1D1E3).


pgp9yj6QWsWrg.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-22 Thread Paul Schmehl

Understood from that perspective, perhaps you can see why people might 
dislike top posting.


Rather, your entire response is at the top, separating itself from the 
context to which it refers.


Furthermore, it can be very confusing to understand precisely what you're 
referring to, because your response doesn't follow those parts of the post 
to which you refer.


Sometimes top posting makes it really hard to follow which parts of the 
previous posters words are being referenced.


If you think about it from the perspective of all of the readers of a 
thread, you might feel differently, however.


I can understand why you might feel that way.

--On November 23, 2007 10:22:50 AM +1300 Brent Jones 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



Sorry if this is a bit off topic for this list, but it seem to be a
comment that comes up very regularly; please don't top post...

I for one prefer top posting, as usually I have read a particular thread
enough times that I like to cut to the chase and read the new input
without having to scroll down, sometimes navigating an endless nesting
of   For me, reading through top posted replies saves time and
effort.  If I happened to miss something in the conversation I can
scroll down to find it.

Anyone else feel the same?

Cheers,
Brent


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-22 Thread Pollywog

On Thursday 22 November 2007 21:22:50 Brent Jones wrote:
 Sorry if this is a bit off topic for this list, but it seem to be a
 comment that comes up very regularly; please don't top post...

 I for one prefer top posting, as usually I have read a particular thread
 enough times that I like to cut to the chase and read the new input
 without having to scroll down, sometimes navigating an endless nesting
 of   For me, reading through top posted replies saves time and
 effort.  If I happened to miss something in the conversation I can
 scroll down to find it.

 Anyone else feel the same?

Since most people don't like top-posting, I try not to do it except 
occasionally in personal email.  I don't do it on mailing lists.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-22 Thread David Kelly


(Moved to freebsd-chat where it belongs.)

On Nov 22, 2007, at 3:22 PM, Brent Jones wrote:

I for one prefer top posting, as usually I have read a particular  
thread

enough times that I like to cut to the chase and read the new input
without having to scroll down, sometimes navigating an endless nesting
of 


Top posting is the worst format to use for reply. Close 2nd worst is  
the no-trim bottom post.


If new content doesn't start somewhere very close to the top then the  
sender failed to create a message worth reading. By trimming and  
inserting comments in the proper place one creates a semblance to the  
alternating back and forth of live conversation.



  For me, reading through top posted replies saves time and
effort.  If I happened to miss something in the conversation I can
scroll down to find it.


Reading from bottom up is painful. Even more painful after a couple  
of generations the added quoting and occasional wrapping get thrown in.


There is no excuse to resend the entire thread with every new  
contribution, especially when dealing with a mailing list. If you  
thought the prior messages were worth keeping then you kept them.  
Else you can go online and find them.


The sender bears some responsibility for every word sent, or re-sent.  
One should never send a message one has not fully read and proofread.  
Top-posters almost never review the bulk they send else they wouldn't  
send the unreadable junk. Or at least I'm giving benefit of doubt  
that they would not.



Anyone else feel the same?


No. Heck no.

--
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.



___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: top posting (off-topic)

2007-11-22 Thread RW

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 10:22:50 +1300
Brent Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Sorry if this is a bit off topic for this list, but it seem to be a
 comment that comes up very regularly; please don't top post...
 
 I for one prefer top posting, as usually I have read a particular
 thread enough times that I like to cut to the chase and read the new
 input without having to scroll down, sometimes navigating an endless
 nesting of   For me, reading through top posted replies saves time
 and effort.  If I happened to miss something in the conversation I can
 scroll down to find it.
 
 Anyone else feel the same?

No, top-posting is superficially appealing when all replies are limited
to a few words that generally end in sucks or rocks, but it doesn't
scale to complex threads. 

The point of quoting is not only to keep a record of what went
before, it's to show which aspects of previous posts are being
addressed by the reply. That sometimes requires multilevel and
interleaved quoting, which doesn't work with top-posting. And by
top-posting you make it harder for the next person to do the right
thing. 

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: cleaning out log files? [top-posting corrected]

2006-11-26 Thread Oliver Iberien

On Sunday 26 November 2006 10:54, you wrote:
 Check /etc/newsyslog.conf
 All log-files you like to have rotated, should be mentioned there.

 System owned logs are in there per default.

 du -k /var will tell you where your space is being consumed.
 Maybe your /var/mail/root is growing...

 How big is your /var anyway?

 Armin

Thank you! I knew something like that had to exist.

It turns out there was a core dump I had not noticed. I had the idea of 
running ls -SlhR /var/  /.../var_contents.txt and looking for anything huge. 

Oliver
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: cleaning out log files? [top-posting corrected]

2006-11-26 Thread Robert Huff

Oliver Iberien writes:

  It turns out there was a core dump I had not noticed. I had the
  idea of running ls -SlhR /var/  /.../var_contents.txt and
  looking for anything huge.

Try this instead:

du /var | sort -nr | head -n 25 | sendmail you



Robert Huff
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Top Posting (was: [Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC])

2005-05-28 Thread bob


hay enough of this BS about top posting.  You have to wake up to the
fact there are many people who belong to this list who are not UNIX
bigots. Us win/outlook people have just as much right to post as the
rest of you. And more to the point who the hell pointed this new
comer of just 10 days (vizion) as the cop to be forcing his slanted
views on the rest of us. To vizion aren't you suppose to be sailing
your boat right now bound for Europe via Panama Canal. Only thing
you have contributed is more background noise. This list was better
with out you. so concentrate on your sailing before you get lost and
need government help to save you from perishing at seas.



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Vizion
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 3:17 PM
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Top Posting (was: [Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC])


On Friday 27 May 2005 12:09,  the author Dmitry Mityugov contributed
to the
dialogue on Re: Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC:
On 5/27/05, Vizion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Friday 27 May 2005 11:18,  the author Dmitry Mityugov
contributed to
 the

 dialogue on Re: Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC:
 On 5/27/05, Vizion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  thread
  this
  to
  post
  top
  not
  do
  Please :-):-) (I have moved your input to bottom!) - it is
easier to
 
 This is not a newsgroup.
 Yes, please.

 this is a mail list -- not a private communication
 This is not a file in which the latest letter gets pinned to the
top!!!
 Please do not bring habits from the paper world to the electronic
world!

Please don't ask me to invent my own habits my friend. Most of them
have been inspired by other people, and for good reasons.

 Netiquette is consideration for others

It is always good to Google for an item before referring someone
else to it.
I dont agree with that -- otherwise I would google everything I
wrote!!

 think of how easy it is to read -

 See how people can, with bottom posting, see the sequence of
events ..
 and therefore understand what you say.
 If you come to a mail list, like this, and want help then those
who might
 be otherwise be willing to help might be discouraged and  ignore
you.
 Forcing people to read your stuff out of sequence is really quite
rude. .
 ,
 Think about long paragraphs
 Think about reading the output from mail list threads and then
responding
 to it..
 Top posting is really inconsiderate and shows lack of experience

I don't agree with this. Please, don't ask me why.

Dont need to know -- but I appreciate your relevant interjection :-)

 Think about the effect of long paragraphs and then having to move
 backwards and forwards and you read one paragraph downwards and
then are
 foprced to move upwards to read the subsequent posting
 Tha means scanning and rescanning.
 Top posting  is neither sensible or practicable for the reader.
 I learnt from those who showed me when I started using email well
before
 the internet began.
 Take care

N/P.

I read what Greg just posted here... If this is indeed how you
live -
well, I'll follow that.
I dont know what Greg posted
Take care
David


--
40 yrs navigating and computing in blue waters.
English Owner  Captain of British Registered 60' bluewater Ketch
S/V Taurus.
 Currently in San Diego, CA. Sailing May bound for Europe via Panama
Canal.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top Posting (was: [Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC])

2005-05-28 Thread Jerry McAllister

 
 
 hay enough of this BS about top posting.  You have to wake up to the
 fact there are many people who belong to this list who are not UNIX
 bigots. 

No top posting has been the rule for the list for a long time - since 
the beginning as far as I know.The rule has nothing to do with UNIX.

It is completely about being able to have a reasonable exchange of 
information.   The list postings are conversational if they have more 
than one response and they often have many.   Several people created 
cute little demonstrations of what it is like to read upside down 
conversations.  It tends to discourage those with real knowledge, but 
too much real work to do to waste their time and energy deciphering 
non-sequential conversations, to contribute their useful information.

   Us win/outlook people have just as much right to post as the
 rest of you. And more to the point who the hell pointed this new
 comer of just 10 days (vizion) as the cop to be forcing his slanted
 views on the rest of us. To vizion aren't you suppose to be sailing
 your boat right now bound for Europe via Panama Canal. Only thing
 you have contributed is more background noise. This list was better
 with out you. so concentrate on your sailing before you get lost and
 need government help to save you from perishing at seas.

As I say, no top posting was not his idea.  He has just learned it
from those with more experience on this list.   Hope you will catch
up eventually.   Get with it!

jerry

 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Vizion
 Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 3:17 PM
 Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
 Subject: Top Posting (was: [Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC])
 
 
 On Friday 27 May 2005 12:09,  the author Dmitry Mityugov contributed
 to the
 dialogue on Re: Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC:
 On 5/27/05, Vizion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On Friday 27 May 2005 11:18,  the author Dmitry Mityugov
 contributed to
  the
 
  dialogue on Re: Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC:
  On 5/27/05, Vizion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   thread
   this
   to
   post
   top
   not
   do
   Please :-):-) (I have moved your input to bottom!) - it is
 easier to
  
  This is not a newsgroup.
  Yes, please.
 
  this is a mail list -- not a private communication
  This is not a file in which the latest letter gets pinned to the
 top!!!
  Please do not bring habits from the paper world to the electronic
 world!
 
 Please don't ask me to invent my own habits my friend. Most of them
 have been inspired by other people, and for good reasons.
 
  Netiquette is consideration for others
 
 It is always good to Google for an item before referring someone
 else to it.
 I dont agree with that -- otherwise I would google everything I
 wrote!!
 
  think of how easy it is to read -
 
  See how people can, with bottom posting, see the sequence of
 events ..
  and therefore understand what you say.
  If you come to a mail list, like this, and want help then those
 who might
  be otherwise be willing to help might be discouraged and  ignore
 you.
  Forcing people to read your stuff out of sequence is really quite
 rude. .
  ,
  Think about long paragraphs
  Think about reading the output from mail list threads and then
 responding
  to it..
  Top posting is really inconsiderate and shows lack of experience
 
 I don't agree with this. Please, don't ask me why.
 
 Dont need to know -- but I appreciate your relevant interjection :-)
 
  Think about the effect of long paragraphs and then having to move
  backwards and forwards and you read one paragraph downwards and
 then are
  foprced to move upwards to read the subsequent posting
  Tha means scanning and rescanning.
  Top posting  is neither sensible or practicable for the reader.
  I learnt from those who showed me when I started using email well
 before
  the internet began.
  Take care
 
 N/P.
 
 I read what Greg just posted here... If this is indeed how you
 live -
 well, I'll follow that.
 I dont know what Greg posted
 Take care
 David
 
 
 --
 40 yrs navigating and computing in blue waters.
 English Owner  Captain of British Registered 60' bluewater Ketch
 S/V Taurus.
  Currently in San Diego, CA. Sailing May bound for Europe via Panama
 Canal.
 ___
 freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 ___
 freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top Posting (was: [Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC])

2005-05-28 Thread Vizion

On Saturday 28 May 2005 06:42,  the author [EMAIL PROTECTED] contributed to 
the dialogue on RE: Top Posting  (was: [Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC]):

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Vizion
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 3:17 PM
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Top Posting (was: [Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC])

On Friday 27 May 2005 12:09,  the author Dmitry Mityugov contributed
to the

dialogue on Re: Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC:
On 5/27/05, Vizion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Friday 27 May 2005 11:18,  the author Dmitry Mityugov

contributed to

 the

 dialogue on Re: Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC:
 On 5/27/05, Vizion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  thread
  this
  to
  post
  top
  not
  do
  Please :-):-) (I have moved your input to bottom!) - it is

easier to

 This is not a newsgroup.
 Yes, please.

 this is a mail list -- not a private communication
 This is not a file in which the latest letter gets pinned to the

top!!!

 Please do not bring habits from the paper world to the electronic

world!

Please don't ask me to invent my own habits my friend. Most of them
have been inspired by other people, and for good reasons.

 Netiquette is consideration for others

It is always good to Google for an item before referring someone

else to it.
I dont agree with that -- otherwise I would google everything I
wrote!!

 think of how easy it is to read -

 See how people can, with bottom posting, see the sequence of

events ..

 and therefore understand what you say.
 If you come to a mail list, like this, and want help then those

who might

 be otherwise be willing to help might be discouraged and  ignore

you.

 Forcing people to read your stuff out of sequence is really quite

rude. .

 ,
 Think about long paragraphs
 Think about reading the output from mail list threads and then

responding

 to it..
 Top posting is really inconsiderate and shows lack of experience

I don't agree with this. Please, don't ask me why.

Dont need to know -- but I appreciate your relevant interjection :-)

 Think about the effect of long paragraphs and then having to move
 backwards and forwards and you read one paragraph downwards and

then are

 foprced to move upwards to read the subsequent posting
 Tha means scanning and rescanning.
 Top posting  is neither sensible or practicable for the reader.
 I learnt from those who showed me when I started using email well

before

 the internet began.
 Take care

N/P.

I read what Greg just posted here... If this is indeed how you

live -

well, I'll follow that.

I dont know what Greg posted
Take care
David
hay enough of this BS about top posting.  You have to wake up to the
fact there are many people who belong to this list who are not UNIX
bigots. Us win/outlook people have just as much right to post as the
rest of you. And more to the point who the hell pointed this new
comer of just 10 days (vizion) as the cop to be forcing his slanted
views on the rest of us. To vizion aren't you suppose to be sailing
your boat right now bound for Europe via Panama Canal. Only thing
you have contributed is more background noise. This list was better
with out you. so concentrate on your sailing before you get lost and
need government help to save you from perishing at seas.

If you really believe that top posting is better then this list gives you your 
democratic opportunity to convince me and everyone else who reads your 
posting. I am sad if you feel personally attacked by the suggestion that top 
posting is more thoughtful way of making a contribution to a discussion than 
bottom posting. If you hold a contrary view then please give us all the 
benefit of your advice.

I  am sad you seem to feel the need to make personal attacks on someone who 
hold an alternative view in the belief that that will advance your cause or 
intimidate debate. Unfortunately there is  there is nothing i can do to 
convince you that such an aggresive approach may be as counter-productive on 
this list as it has been elsewhere.

In the long term I believe you could realize that the act of top posting has 
the same effect whether we post from any type of computer system - (I use win 
XP/2000/98, apple, Linux or Freebsd) so do not believe you need to be 
influenced by the fact you are using Microsoft Outlook as your mailer. 

I believe, in a technical mailing list,  the theme of concern for the reader 
is the central issue and that theme remains the same whatever mailer or OS 
you happen to use. I would like to persuade you to concentrate on that issue 
and not be be sidetracked by discussing my connection to the sea, which is as 
irrelevant to the discussion as your connection to Ohio. I want to hear what 
you have to say to support your point of view.

I would suggest that how easy it is for readers to follow, and contribute, to 
the thread is what need to consider. I therefore believe that my use of unix, 
zenix, cpm and Dos before Dos

Re: Top Posting (was: [Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC])

2005-05-28 Thread Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC



someone wrote:


Think about the effect of long paragraphs and then having to move
backwards and forwards and you read one paragraph downwards and  
then are

foprced to move upwards to read the subsequent posting
Tha means scanning and rescanning.
Top posting  is neither sensible or practicable for the reader.
I learnt from those who showed me when I started using email well  
before

the internet began.
Take care





Utter BS.  You don't have to move back and forth to the top and to  
the bottom.  A lot of us follow a thread and don't like to have to  
read the whole thread each time an update is made.  There are times  
when top posting is MORE APPROPRIATE and times when top post is LESS  
APPROPRIATE.  Top posting is not evil and often is EASIER to read.   
And often not.  But long drawn on threads are often read easier with  
top posting so that those of us who remember what happened earlier in  
the thread can get to the meat of it and we can just scroll down as  
much as necessary to catch up.  If everyone top posted in a thread it  
is easy to read that way.


Email user since before 1984.

Chad
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top Posting (was: [Freebsd 5.4 not finding my NIC])

2005-05-28 Thread Vizion

On Saturday 28 May 2005 09:28,  the author Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC 
contributed to the dialogue on Re: Top Posting  (was: [Freebsd 5.4 not 
finding my NIC]):
someone wrote:
 Think about the effect of long paragraphs and then having to move
 backwards and forwards and you read one paragraph downwards and
 then are
 foprced to move upwards to read the subsequent posting
 Tha means scanning and rescanning.
 Top posting  is neither sensible or practicable for the reader.
 I learnt from those who showed me when I started using email well
 before
 the internet began.
 Take care

Utter BS.  
expletives are funny -- for those of use with a sense of humor :-)

You don't have to move back and forth to the top and to 
the bottom. 

You need to move to the bottom before you post to remove unnecessary bottom 
material in any case. It is easy to forget to clean up when you top post - so 
why not move there and then post in the knowledge that you are thereby 
following the rules.

You have to move back and forth if there are a series of postings and the 
first posting is at the bottom and the last at the top. You move down to read 
the post and then up past what you have read through the previous post and 
then down through that one etc..

I understand that people need to feel that their contribution is important. 
For this reason I wonder,if for some people, the idea of bottom posting does 
not appeal because it puts their words after those contributed by others. 



A lot of us follow a thread and don't like to have to 
read the whole thread each time an update is made.

You dont have to read -- you just go to the end (sometimes you are surprised 
by postings you may have missed because you assumed you had read the whole 
thread and find out you had missed something- (I find top posters often fall 
into that trap) -- clean up and then post.
 
My reaction is there is truth in what you say for those who remember previous 
postings however for the majority who have not (including those who take the 
postings as a daily archive for corporate reference) that is not true. 

That is why the rule on all FreeBSD lists is against top posting -- and always 
has been (as it is for most mail lists)

Do you not think that in the immediacy of the dialogue it is easy to forget 
that the greatest value of our current contributions is the value they have 
as an archive? .

There are times 
when top posting is MORE APPROPRIATE and times when top post is LESS
APPROPRIATE.  
I hear you -- you do not need to shout grinz the question is more 
appropriate for whom? The reader or the writer?? For the to and fro of 
personal  correspondence I think I might be tempted to agree with you. But to 
make an assumption that everyone is following the posting well I think that 
is one assumption too many. 

Top posting is not evil 
I would concur -- but as my argument does not depend upon evilness it is not 
to my mind a relevant point :-)

and often is EASIER to read.
Your notion depends upon the mental model you have created for yourself to 
represent the mailing list world.  Why should you make such an assumption if 
your model does not take into account the reality that the communication is 
going to thousands of people most of whom will not read what is said for 
days? 
How can you make such an assumption if your model of readership does not take 
into account the fact that the majority of readers will not have any 
recollection of previous contributions?


But long drawn on threads are often read easier with
top posting so that those of us who remember what happened earlier in
the thread can get to the meat of it and we can just scroll down as
much as necessary to catch up.  If everyone top posted in a thread it
is easy to read that way.
Are you not contradicting yourself here..

Email user since before 1984.

Well me to -- well before then and before tcp/ip-- Oh the days of uucp - when 
you had to know the route 

take care
david


-- 
40 yrs navigating and computing in blue waters.
English Owner  Captain of British Registered 60' bluewater Ketch S/V Taurus.
 Currently in San Diego, CA. Sailing May bound for Europe via Panama Canal.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

OT: Top posting [Re: Hello List]

2004-11-10 Thread Svein Halvor Halvorsen


[Ben Haysom, 2004-11-10]
  What is top posting?

A: Because it reverses the natural flow of the conversation?
Q: Why is that bad?
A: To write your raply on top of the original message
Q: What is top posting?


(I find that qouting in a resonable manner is far more important than 
wheter the response is on top or not)

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

OT: Top posting [ was Re: Hello List ]

2004-11-10 Thread Erik Norgaard

Ben Haysom wrote:

 What is top posting?

Top posting is when you write your reply _above_ what you are replying
to. This paragraph was posted _below_ the question I respond to.

Among other good practices are: Remove what you are not responding to.
Subject should reflect the content of the message. etc.

All these rules makes it easier for the receipient to read your post and
understand the context of what you are writing. Failing this may make
some people annoyed and annoyed people are generally less helpfull.

Take a look at http://www.lemis.com/questions.html or
ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/fyi/fyi28.txt

Cheers, Erik

-- 
Ph: +34.666334818  web: www.locolomo.org
S/MIME Certificate: http://www.locolomo.org/crt/2004071206.crt
Subject ID:  A9:76:7A:ED:06:95:2B:8D:48:97:CE:F2:3F:42:C8:F2:22:DE:4C:B9
Fingerprint: 4A:E8:63:38:46:F6:9A:5D:B4:DC:29:41:3F:62:D3:0A:73:25:67:C2
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-12 Thread Peter Risdon

Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 August 2004 at 14:58:02 -0700, Kevin Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, JJB wrote:

The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the Unix
email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email while
indenting with a quote character.
Not true.  Pine doesn't, for example.  It begins a reply with the cursor
at the very top of the message body.

In fact, the entire concept is flawed.  You should be able to write
text anywhere you want in a reply.  Even most Microsoft-oriented MUAs
allow that.
Absolutely. Wherever your cursor starts off when you reply to a mail, 
you'll have to move it about to reply in a legible way.

[...]

To all you Unix hard liners, Please instead of complaining to the
top posters, it would be so much nicer if you just informed the
[truncated by sender]
It would actually be much nicer if they'd just quit trying to
enforce their preferences on others.
It also has nothing whatsoever to do with Unix or personal preferences. 
Nobody has any interest at all in how you format mails in any context 
other than this list.

And these issues affect mails on lists regarding all technical issues. 
You'll find correct formatting on MS tech lists as well, though 
admittedly it tends to be patchier there.

The point is that these mails are not private correspondence; they form 
a public archive. Once an OP has had several contributions added to it, 
the only way it remains a useful reference is if reasonable discipline 
is observed by contributors.

In fact, the formatting requested for FreeBSD lists is clear:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/mailing-list-faq/etiquette.html
And the only people trying to enforce their personal preferences on 
others are those who ignore this guidance.

Peter.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-11 Thread Mark Ovens

Chris wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Tuesday, August 10, 2004 05:45:58 PM -0400 JJB 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Over the years I have seen many posts on this list where Unix hard
liners complain about people posting their replies to the top of the
email messages on this list.
The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the Unix
email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email while
indenting with a quote character.
Not true.  Pine doesn't.  Mulberry doesn't.  I don't believe Evolution 
does.  I'm pretty sure the Firefox solution (don't recall the name) 
doesn't.
Thunderbird gives you the option
And of course OE/Outlook users could just learn to hit Ctrl-End before 
they start typing :-)

Mark
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-11 Thread Bart Silverstrim

On Aug 10, 2004, at 6:25 PM, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
Here's a good reason to top-post: I'm referring to the message as a
whole, rather than to the content.
What reference to a whole?  Whole what?
This message came in while I was writing my previous message in this
thread.  It shows *exactly* the points I was referring to.
What are you referring to?
Yes, the
reply is posted at the bottom, but the quoted text is mutilated beyond
what anybody could have believed 20 years ago.  Your reply appears to
refer to the last paragraph only (I suppose; I can't read the
message), but you've (mis)quoted it in its entirety.
Whereas I have no idea what you're referring to now.
A question to you: do you like the appearance of this message?
It's a very pretty message.  But it is all blah blah blah blah if I 
haven't a frame of reference for the content in question.

Whereas this way of replying reads like  conversation; moreover, 
Mail.app will highlight lines with indent marking and color so I can 
easily process what was already written visually and if I want to skip 
it, I can; if I'm reading a conversation, I can easily tell what was 
written and at what point.

 Or do
you do it because it's too difficult to write a tidy reply?
Top posting?  Or inline posting?  I inline because it's more like a 
conversation style.  It's PRECISE.  I know exactly what point is being 
referred to, and I would think that ambiguity is something in the 
technology field that should be AVOIDED.

You should get a new one then.
New what?  What is being referred to if the message as a whole is 
more than three paragraphs?  And am I right with my assumption of what 
it's referring to?

Vs.:
My car is a piece of crap.  $^@@# thing broke down for the third time 
today.
You should get a new one then.

AH!  Simple.  Referring to the car.  Not the dog that chewed the shoes, 
or the DVD player that has buffer problems, or anything else in the 
contrived example...

I suspect
the latter, and that's the point I'm trying to make.  I do
occasionally have to use Outlook, and I find it incredibly painful
to use.
No, I think the latter makes it sound more like the replier has 
schizophrenia and is talking to himself.  My personal theory was that 
more literate people tend to inline post while the less literate tended 
to top-post, but I'm not in a field where I could study that theory 
conclusively. Longer top posters seem to ramble on and on, unless the 
reader scrolls down to figure out what in hell they're referring to.  
The only time I top post is when I'm truly sending something as 
content that shouldn't be forwarded again (a notice or memo, a story 
that should NOT be edited to understand it...and people that keep 
forwarding jokes ad infinitum, PLEASE trim the damned quoted HEADERS!!) 
as well as propagate a growing list of crud that ISN'T referred to.  
It's not a matter of pretty replies, it's laziness.  Pure laziness.  
When I want to reply to a point or question, I quote the reply or 
question portion and don't include the sigs or the random crap already 
inserted.

Let's stop trying to justify top posting for every single email out 
there and just admit it; people are lazy.  People who top post for 
*everything* are just lazy with trimming crap out.  they want to spill 
out their response and that's it.  There are some things we're lazy 
about that can be taken care of with features or protocol; for 
instance, word wrapping.  Someone is going to justify my asbestos 
underwear as I send this because I didn't word wrap at 72 characters. 
Why?!  Because I didn't keep hitting enter at reasonable spots.  Most 
mail readers will do it automatically. My reader doesn't.  I'm using 
Mail.app; it uses a different method for dynamically wrapping 
text...forgot what it was called already...but basically no matter what 
the display is, it'll word wrap my mail so that it appears legible 
(within reason) and if I manually insert returns, it'll look like CRAP 
as it interprets the linefeeds.  That can be taken care of by using a 
reader with this feature (it's an open standard...) and inserting the 
manual feeds reminds me of the idiots that typed up their five page 
reports in word processors by hitting enter at the end of each line and 
then inserting a word so there were stair-stepping throughout the 
entire friggin' document.  Deal with it.  That's something that can be 
taken care of by updating readers so that when the right character is 
hit, it inserts on your display a linefeed and quote character. This 
means that in the age approaching, you may be able to actually read 
your email from your system at home with the huge display, your PDA, 
and your laptop, each with different resolutions and screen sizes but 
at the same time be able to read your email without scrolling all over 
timbuktu (that's actually why Apple used this format...the company that 
started it, Qualcomm?...was coming up with a simple way for messages to 
be read on anything from

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-11 Thread Joachim Dagerot

(This message is also located at the bottom of the message, and also
in-line)


[top post]
Oh boy, am I tired of this discussion that in some kind of nature law
must pop up every three or four month.





 |  Here's a good reason to top-post: I'm referring to the message as
a
 |  whole, rather than to the content.
 | 
 | What reference to a whole?  Whole what?
 | 
 | 
 |  This message came in while I was writing my previous message in
this
 |  thread.  It shows *exactly* the points I was referring to.
 | 
 | What are you referring to?
 | 
 |  Yes, the
 |  reply is posted at the bottom, but the quoted text is mutilated
beyond
 |  what anybody could have believed 20 years ago.  Your reply
appears to
 |  refer to the last paragraph only (I suppose; I can't read the
 |  message), but you've (mis)quoted it in its entirety.
 | 
 | 

[inline]
Oh boy, am I tired of this discussion that in some kind of nature law
must pop up every three or four month.


 | Whereas I have no idea what you're referring to now.
 | 
 |  A question to you: do you like the appearance of this message?
 | 
 | It's a very pretty message.  But it is all blah blah blah blah if I

 | haven't a frame of reference for the content in question.
 | 
 | Whereas this way of replying reads like  conversation; moreover, 
 | Mail.app will highlight lines with indent marking and color so I
can 
 | easily process what was already written visually and if I want to
skip 
 | it, I can; if I'm reading a conversation, I can easily tell what
was 
 | written and at what point.
 | 
 |   Or do
 |  you do it because it's too difficult to write a tidy reply?
 | 
 | Top posting?  Or inline posting?  I inline because it's more like a

 | conversation style.  It's PRECISE.  I know exactly what point is
being 
 | referred to, and I would think that ambiguity is something in the 
 | technology field that should be AVOIDED.
 | 
 | You should get a new one then.
 | 
 | New what?  What is being referred to if the message as a whole is

 | more than three paragraphs?  And am I right with my assumption of
what 
 | it's referring to?
 | 
 | Vs.:
 | 
 |  My car is a piece of crap.  $^@@# thing broke down for the third
time 
 | today.
 | You should get a new one then.
 | 
 | AH!  Simple.  Referring to the car.  Not the dog that chewed the
shoes, 
 | or the DVD player that has buffer problems, or anything else in the

 | contrived example...
 | 
 |  I suspect
 |  the latter, and that's the point I'm trying to make.  I do
 |  occasionally have to use Outlook, and I find it incredibly
painful
 |  to use.
 | 
 | No, I think the latter makes it sound more like the replier has 
 | schizophrenia and is talking to himself.  My personal theory was
that 
 | more literate people tend to inline post while the less literate
tended 
 | to top-post, but I'm not in a field where I could study that theory

 | conclusively. Longer top posters seem to ramble on and on, unless
the 
 | reader scrolls down to figure out what in hell they're referring
to.  
 | The only time I top post is when I'm truly sending something as 
 | content that shouldn't be forwarded again (a notice or memo, a
story 
 | that should NOT be edited to understand it...and people that keep 
 | forwarding jokes ad infinitum, PLEASE trim the damned quoted
HEADERS!!) 
 | as well as propagate a growing list of crud that ISN'T referred to.
 
 | It's not a matter of pretty replies, it's laziness.  Pure laziness.
 
 | When I want to reply to a point or question, I quote the reply or 
 | question portion and don't include the sigs or the random crap
already 
 | inserted.
 | 
 | Let's stop trying to justify top posting for every single email out

 | there and just admit it; people are lazy.  People who top post for 
 | *everything* are just lazy with trimming crap out.  they want to
spill 
 | out their response and that's it.  There are some things we're lazy

 | about that can be taken care of with features or protocol; for 
 | instance, word wrapping.  Someone is going to justify my asbestos 
 | underwear as I send this because I didn't word wrap at 72
characters. 
 | Why?!  Because I didn't keep hitting enter at reasonable spots. 
Most 
 | mail readers will do it automatically. My reader doesn't.  I'm
using 
 | Mail.app; it uses a different method for dynamically wrapping 
 | text...forgot what it was called already...but basically no matter
what 
 | the display is, it'll word wrap my mail so that it appears legible 
 | (within reason) and if I manually insert returns, it'll look like
CRAP 
 | as it interprets the linefeeds.  That can be taken care of by using
a 
 | reader with this feature (it's an open standard...) and inserting
the 
 | manual feeds reminds me of the idiots that typed up their five page

 | reports in word processors by hitting enter at the end of each line
and 
 | then inserting a word so there were stair-stepping throughout the 
 | entire friggin' document.  Deal with it.  That's something that can

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-11 Thread Danny

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:45:58 -0400, JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Over the years I have seen many posts on this list where Unix hard
 liners complain about people posting their replies to the top of the
 email messages on this list.
 
 The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the Unix
 email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email while
 indenting with a quote character.
 
 Top posting came along when MS/Windows came on the market with their
 own email clients: Outlook express which is the email client built
 into Internet explorer and the MS/Office Outlook email client.
 
 There is a little known fix for MS/Outlook express and MS/Office
 Outlook email clients that change the behavior of these MS/Windows
 email clients so they adhere to the Unix email format of posting the
 reply to the bottom of the email while indenting with a quote
 character.
 
 Information and fix download can be found at these URLs.
 
  MS/Outlook express
 http://home.cs.tum.edu/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
 
  MS/Office Outlook
 http://home.cs.tum.edu/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/
 
 To all you Unix hard liners, Please instead of complaining to the
 top posters, it would be so much nicer if you just informed the
 MS/Windows top poster of the above links so they know about the
 solution to fix their email clients to adhere to the Unix email
 format used on this list.

Geez this is tough to ask cause it has nothing to do with FreeBSD, but
has anyone tried this (Outlook-quotefix) with Outlook 2003 in an
Exchange (2000 or 2003 envrionment)?

For the record, I love FreeBSD and utilize it's power throughout a
company which is mainly MS (not my choice right now) boxen. :)

...D
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-11 Thread Gerard Seibert

On Wednesday, August 11, 2004 12:24:24 PM Bart Silverstrim 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

|Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:45:13 -0400
|From: Bart Silverstrim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: Re: Top posting solution
|To: FreeBSD Questions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
|
|
|On Aug 10, 2004, at 6:25 PM, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
|
| Here's a good reason to top-post: I'm referring to the message as a
| whole, rather than to the content.
|
|What reference to a whole?  Whole what?
|
|
| This message came in while I was writing my previous message in this
| thread.  It shows *exactly* the points I was referring to.
|
|What are you referring to?
|
| Yes, the
| reply is posted at the bottom, but the quoted text is mutilated beyond
| what anybody could have believed 20 years ago.  Your reply appears to
| refer to the last paragraph only (I suppose; I can't read the
| message), but you've (mis)quoted it in its entirety.
|
|
|Whereas I have no idea what you're referring to now.
|
| A question to you: do you like the appearance of this message?
|
|It's a very pretty message.  But it is all blah blah blah blah if I
|haven't a frame of reference for the content in question.
|
|Whereas this way of replying reads like  conversation; moreover,
|Mail.app will highlight lines with indent marking and color so I can
|easily process what was already written visually and if I want to skip
|it, I can; if I'm reading a conversation, I can easily tell what was
|written and at what point.
|
|  Or do
| you do it because it's too difficult to write a tidy reply?
|
|Top posting?  Or inline posting?  I inline because it's more like a
|conversation style.  It's PRECISE.  I know exactly what point is being
|referred to, and I would think that ambiguity is something in the
|technology field that should be AVOIDED.
|
|You should get a new one then.
|
|New what?  What is being referred to if the message as a whole is
|more than three paragraphs?  And am I right with my assumption of what
|it's referring to?
|
|Vs.:
|
| My car is a piece of crap.  $^@@# thing broke down for the third time
|today.
|You should get a new one then.
|
|AH!  Simple.  Referring to the car.  Not the dog that chewed the shoes,
|or the DVD player that has buffer problems, or anything else in the
|contrived example...
|
| I suspect
| the latter, and that's the point I'm trying to make.  I do
| occasionally have to use Outlook, and I find it incredibly painful
| to use.
|
|No, I think the latter makes it sound more like the replier has
|schizophrenia and is talking to himself.  My personal theory was that
|more literate people tend to inline post while the less literate tended
|to top-post, but I'm not in a field where I could study that theory
|conclusively. Longer top posters seem to ramble on and on, unless the
|reader scrolls down to figure out what in hell they're referring to.
|The only time I top post is when I'm truly sending something as
|content that shouldn't be forwarded again (a notice or memo, a story
|that should NOT be edited to understand it...and people that keep
|forwarding jokes ad infinitum, PLEASE trim the damned quoted HEADERS!!)
|as well as propagate a growing list of crud that ISN'T referred to.
|It's not a matter of pretty replies, it's laziness.  Pure laziness.
|When I want to reply to a point or question, I quote the reply or
|question portion and don't include the sigs or the random crap already
|inserted.
|
|Let's stop trying to justify top posting for every single email out
|there and just admit it; people are lazy.  People who top post for
|*everything* are just lazy with trimming crap out.  they want to spill
|out their response and that's it.  There are some things we're lazy
|about that can be taken care of with features or protocol; for
|instance, word wrapping.  Someone is going to justify my asbestos
|underwear as I send this because I didn't word wrap at 72 characters.
|Why?!  Because I didn't keep hitting enter at reasonable spots.  Most
|mail readers will do it automatically. My reader doesn't.  I'm using
|Mail.app; it uses a different method for dynamically wrapping
|text...forgot what it was called already...but basically no matter what
|the display is, it'll word wrap my mail so that it appears legible
|(within reason) and if I manually insert returns, it'll look like CRAP
|as it interprets the linefeeds.  That can be taken care of by using a
|reader with this feature (it's an open standard...) and inserting the
|manual feeds reminds me of the idiots that typed up their five page
|reports in word processors by hitting enter at the end of each line and
|then inserting a word so there were stair-stepping throughout the
|entire friggin' document.  Deal with it.  That's something that can be
|taken care of by updating readers so that when the right character is
|hit, it inserts on your display a linefeed and quote character. This
|means that in the age approaching

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Kevin Stevens

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, JJB wrote:

 The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the Unix
 email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email while
 indenting with a quote character.

Not true.  Pine doesn't, for example.  It begins a reply with the cursor
at the very top of the message body.

 Top posting came along when MS/Windows came on the market with their
 own email clients: Outlook express which is the email client built
 into Internet explorer and the MS/Office Outlook email client.

Not true.  See above.

 There is a little known fix for MS/Outlook express and MS/Office
 Outlook email clients that change the behavior of these MS/Windows
 email clients so they adhere to the Unix email format of posting the
 reply to the bottom of the email while indenting with a quote
 character.

Fix is a loaded term which presumes that something is broken.

 To all you Unix hard liners, Please instead of complaining to the
 top posters, it would be so much nicer if you just informed the

It would actually be much nicer if they'd just quit trying to enforce
their preferences on others.

 MS/Windows top poster of the above links so they know about the
 solution to fix their email clients to adhere to the Unix email
 format used on this list.

Please provide a cite/ref to the Unix email format as something more
concrete than your personal definition.  And more concrete than RFC 1855,
whose second sentence reads: This memo does not specify an Internet
standard of any kind.

KeS
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Paul Schmehl

--On Tuesday, August 10, 2004 05:45:58 PM -0400 JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

Over the years I have seen many posts on this list where Unix hard
liners complain about people posting their replies to the top of the
email messages on this list.
The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the Unix
email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email while
indenting with a quote character.
Not true.  Pine doesn't.  Mulberry doesn't.  I don't believe Evolution 
does.  I'm pretty sure the Firefox solution (don't recall the name) doesn't.

But I'm trying to think why someone would be posting to a freebsd list from 
a Windows box

Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

On Tuesday, 10 August 2004 at 14:58:02 -0700, Kevin Stevens wrote:
 On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, JJB wrote:

 The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the Unix
 email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email while
 indenting with a quote character.

 Not true.  Pine doesn't, for example.  It begins a reply with the cursor
 at the very top of the message body.

In fact, the entire concept is flawed.  You should be able to write
text anywhere you want in a reply.  Even most Microsoft-oriented MUAs
allow that.

 There is a little known fix for MS/Outlook express and MS/Office
 Outlook email clients that change the behavior of these MS/Windows
 email clients so they adhere to the Unix email format of posting the
 reply to the bottom of the email while indenting with a quote
 character.

Yes, I refer to it at http://www.lemis.com/email/fixing-outlook.html.
Unfortunately, it doesn't address the basic problems with Outlook.

 Fix is a loaded term which presumes that something is broken.

I think that Outlook is broken.  Putting the text in the right
relative place doesn't help much if it's so difficult to write
well-formatted messages that most people don't bother.  What any good
MUA needs is a text editor (or, preferably, an interface to one) that
makes it easy to send well-formatted messages.

 To all you Unix hard liners, Please instead of complaining to the
 top posters, it would be so much nicer if you just informed the
 [truncated by sender]

 It would actually be much nicer if they'd just quit trying to
 enforce their preferences on others.

It would actually be much nicer if people would return to literacy
standards that existed, not only in the computer world, before
Microsoft came along.  I've long given up actively trying to help
people write literate mail.  I just ignore their messages.  That's not
helpful either, except to me.

 MS/Windows top poster of the above links so they know about the
 solution to fix their email clients to adhere to the Unix email
 format used on this list.

 Please provide a cite/ref to the Unix email format as something
 more concrete than your personal definition.  And more concrete than
 RFC 1855, whose second sentence reads: This memo does not specify
 an Internet standard of any kind.

RFC 1055 is a good start.  What matter is that the second sentence
states (obviously incorrectly for an RFC)?  It seems that you'd reject
anything which isn't concrete enough for your own way of thinking.
Certainly I don't think of a Unix email format (or even a UNIX
email format); I just like to be able to read messages which don't
make themselves painful to read, that don't contain lots of irrelevant
junk, and that don't give me the impression that the sender is only
semi-literate.  For more details, you might like to take a look at
http://www.lemis.com/email/email-format.html, though I suppose you'll
find a reason to reject it.

Greg
--
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgp1Q6tVMGhLK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Gary

Hi Paul,
--On Tuesday, August 10, 2004 5:13 PM -0500 Paul Schmehl 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

But I'm trying to think why someone would be posting to a freebsd list
from a Windows box
Because some of us are working in part on building / servicing a 
predominantly Windows network during the day, while reading mail on my 
FreeBSD mail/
DNS/IMAPS server as is the case now g

--
Gary
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

Here's a good reason to top-post: I'm referring to the message as a
whole, rather than to the content.

This message came in while I was writing my previous message in this
thread.  It shows *exactly* the points I was referring to.  Yes, the
reply is posted at the bottom, but the quoted text is mutilated beyond
what anybody could have believed 20 years ago.  Your reply appears to
refer to the last paragraph only (I suppose; I can't read the
message), but you've (mis)quoted it in its entirety.

A question to you: do you like the appearance of this message?  Or do
you do it because it's too difficult to write a tidy reply?  I suspect
the latter, and that's the point I'm trying to make.  I do
occasionally have to use Outlook, and I find it incredibly painful
to use.

On Tuesday, 10 August 2004 at 18:14:41 -0400, JJB wrote:
 Kevin Stevens wrote:
 On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, JJB wrote:

 The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the Unix
 email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email
 while
 indenting with a quote character.

 Not true.  Pine doesn't, for example.  It begins a reply with the
 cursor at the very top of the message body.

 Top posting came along when MS/Windows came on the market with
 their
 own email clients: Outlook express which is the email client
 built
 into Internet explorer and the MS/Office Outlook email client.

 Not true.  See above.

 There is a little known fix for MS/Outlook express and MS/Office
 Outlook email clients that change the behavior of these
 MS/Windows
 email clients so they adhere to the Unix email format of posting
 the
 reply to the bottom of the email while indenting with a quote
 character.

 Fix is a loaded term which presumes that something is broken.

 To all you Unix hard liners, Please instead of complaining to the
 top posters, it would be so much nicer if you just informed the

 It would actually be much nicer if they'd just quit trying to
 enforce
 their preferences on others.

 MS/Windows top poster of the above links so they know about the
 solution to fix their email clients to adhere to the Unix email
 format used on this list.

 Please provide a cite/ref to the Unix email format as something
 more
 concrete than your personal definition.  And more concrete than
 RFC
 1855, whose second sentence reads: This memo does not specify an
 Internet standard of any kind.

 KeS

 So your a hard core purest on the other side of the coin. You can
 nit pick about wording all you want. It still does not detract from
 the fact that there is an 'FIX' to change the behavior of MS/windows
 top posting. As always, the reader has the chose in how they want to
 reply to posts on this list, top or bottom posting.






 ___
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgpTMHl1ygrhq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Chris

Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Tuesday, August 10, 2004 05:45:58 PM -0400 JJB 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Over the years I have seen many posts on this list where Unix hard
liners complain about people posting their replies to the top of the
email messages on this list.
The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the Unix
email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email while
indenting with a quote character.
Not true.  Pine doesn't.  Mulberry doesn't.  I don't believe Evolution 
does.  I'm pretty sure the Firefox solution (don't recall the name) 
doesn't.
Thunderbird gives you the option
--
Best regards,
Chris
An optimist believes we live in the best of all
possible worlds.
A pessimist fears this is true.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Kevin Stevens

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, JJB wrote:

 So your a hard core purest on the other side of the coin.

You know absolutely nothing about my position on this subject other than
what you infer from the formatting of the posts I've made.  The fact that
I reject specious argument from incorrect facts is irrelevant to how I
feel about top posting.

 You can nit pick about wording all you want. It still does not detract
 from the fact that there is an 'FIX' to change the behavior of
 MS/windows top posting. As always, the reader has the chose in how they
 want to reply to posts on this list, top or bottom posting.

Or whether to use a spell/grammar checker, of course.  Might as well
switch fires.

KeS
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread David Kelly

On Aug 10, 2004, at 5:20 PM, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
It would actually be much nicer if people would return to literacy
standards that existed, not only in the computer world, before
Microsoft came along.  I've long given up actively trying to help
people write literate mail.  I just ignore their messages.  That's not
helpful either, except to me.
I got fed up with the top posters on other lists expecting ME to help 
THEM in spite of blatantly ignoring my instructions on how to properly 
reply. So I use the following .signature which accurately and briefly 
states my position. I won't honor them with a reply, however the door 
is wide open if I believe they need a bit of dishonoring.

--
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Top posters will not be shown the honor of a reply.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread David Kelly

On Aug 10, 2004, at 4:58 PM, Kevin Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, JJB wrote:
The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the Unix
email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email while
indenting with a quote character.
Not true.  Pine doesn't, for example.  It begins a reply with the 
cursor
at the very top of the message body.
Cursor at the top on reply is correct. Its correct because that is 
where one should start *editing*, is very rarely where one should start 
*typing*. Blaming the situation on Microsoft is too simplistic.

The #1 problem I have with top-posters is that they fail to read the 
entire message they are re-sending. Had they bothered to read the whole 
thing they would have deleted the illegible bulk. But then again if 
they would actually read their own message in its entirety they'd know 
it was a mess with everything out of order and badly formatted and 
learn to properly trim and reply with inserted comments.

--
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Top posters will not be shown the honor of a reply.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Giorgos Keramidas

On 2004-08-10 18:14, JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Kevin Stevens wrote:
  On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, JJB wrote:
 
  The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the Unix
  email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email
 while
  indenting with a quote character.
 
  Not true.  Pine doesn't, for example.  It begins a reply with the
  cursor at the very top of the message body.
 
  Top posting came along when MS/Windows came on the market with
 their
  own email clients: Outlook express which is the email client
 built

[...]

  Please provide a cite/ref to the Unix email format as something
 more
  concrete than your personal definition.  And more concrete than
 RFC
  1855, whose second sentence reads: This memo does not specify an
  Internet standard of any kind.

 So your a hard core purest on the other side of the coin. You can
 nit pick about wording all you want. It still does not detract from
 the fact that there is an 'FIX' to change the behavior of MS/windows
 top posting. As always, the reader has the chose in how they want to
 reply to posts on this list, top or bottom posting.

I apologize in advance if I jump in in what might sound like a
knit-picking manner.  However, if this fix produces messages like the
one above, where all the usual mutilation of Outlook regarding quoting
and wrapping the text is clearly visible...

it's not a fix :-(

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Eric Crist

CRAP.  HERE WE GO AGAIN.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JJB
 Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 4:46 PM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ORG
 Subject: Top posting solution

 Over the years I have seen many posts on this list where Unix
 hard liners complain about people posting their replies to
 the top of the email messages on this list.

 The fact of life is all the Unix mail clients adhere to the
 Unix email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the
 email while indenting with a quote character.

 Top posting came along when MS/Windows came on the market
 with their own email clients: Outlook express which is the
 email client built into Internet explorer and the MS/Office
 Outlook email client.

 There is a little known fix for MS/Outlook express and
 MS/Office Outlook email clients that change the behavior of
 these MS/Windows email clients so they adhere to the Unix
 email format of posting the reply to the bottom of the email
 while indenting with a quote character.

 Information and fix download can be found at these URLs.

  MS/Outlook express http://home.cs.tum.edu/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

  MS/Office Outlook
 http://home.cs.tum.edu/~jain/software/outlook- quotefix/

 To
 all you Unix hard liners, Please instead of
 complaining to the top posters, it would be so much nicer if
 you just informed the MS/Windows top poster of the above
 links so they know about the solution to fix their email
 clients to adhere to the Unix email format used on this list.

 Thanks for you attention

 ___
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/free bsd-questions

 To unsubscribe, send any mail to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

CRAP. HERE WE GO AGAIN.

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Chuck Swiger

Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2004-08-10 18:14, JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ ...badly quoted stuff... ]
I apologize in advance if I jump in in what might sound like a
knit-picking manner.  However, if this fix produces messages like the
one above, where all the usual mutilation of Outlook regarding quoting
and wrapping the text is clearly visible...
it's not a fix :-(
Giorgos-- it would be reasonable to assume that JJB was using the tool he 
speaks of, only that would not be correct; oe-quotefix doesn't work with 
Outlook itself:

] From: JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
] Subject: RE: Top posting solution
] Message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
] X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
] X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0)
[ Only someone condemned to support Windows users would want to understand the 
relationship between Outlook and OE in more detail, so suffice it to say that 
the two are much more different than one might expect from the shared name. ]

Anyway, the oe-quotefix utility actually does do a pretty good job of fixing 
the braindead quoting of Outlook Express.  But I'd much rather use Mozilla 
than Outlook from the standpoints of both security and only mildly broken mail 
composition by comparision.  But then, I'd rather use Mail.app than Mozilla. 
For that matter, I'd rather use Emacs with fill-mode on and fill-column set to 
76-- for two levels of quoting and a space to fit into 80-cols without 
wrapping-- to actually compose ASCII text than anything else.

oe-quotefix behaves very much like what M-q (fill-paragraph) does in Emacs.
--
-Chuck
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread Giorgos Keramidas

On 2004-08-10 22:02, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
 On 2004-08-10 18:14, JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 [ ...badly quoted stuff... ]
 I apologize in advance if I jump in in what might sound like a
 knit-picking manner.  However, if this fix produces messages like the
 one above, where all the usual mutilation of Outlook regarding quoting
 and wrapping the text is clearly visible...
 
 it's not a fix :-(

 Giorgos-- it would be reasonable to assume that JJB was using the tool he
 speaks of, only that would not be correct; oe-quotefix doesn't work with
 Outlook itself:

 ] From: JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ] Subject: RE: Top posting solution
 ] Message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ] X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
 ] X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0)

 [ Only someone condemned to support Windows users would want to understand
 the relationship between Outlook and OE in more detail, so suffice it to
 say that the two are much more different than one might expect from the
 shared name. ]

Thanks for the clarification!  I was sleepy when I replied and somehow
missed the important yet subtle detail.  I do know the differences of
Outlook and OE.  I regularly have to read email formatted [or should I
say unformatted?] by Outlook 2003 for my $realjob and I've used both
Outlook and OE in the past.

I just felt it was a bit funny to find a message in support of Outlook that
exhibited exactly the sort of malformed output that Outlook is known for.
What I wrote wasn't meant to be an offense to JJB who's one of the regular
posters and *does* contribute a lot to helping others :-)

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Top posting solution

2004-08-10 Thread JJB

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 2004-08-10 22:02, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
 On 2004-08-10 18:14, JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [
...badly
 quoted stuff... ] I apologize in advance if I jump in in what
might
 sound like a knit-picking manner.  However, if this fix
produces
 messages like the one above, where all the usual mutilation of
 Outlook regarding quoting and wrapping the text is clearly
 visible...

 it's not a fix :-(

 Giorgos-- it would be reasonable to assume that JJB was using the
 tool he speaks of, only that would not be correct; oe-quotefix
 doesn't work with Outlook itself:

 ] From: JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ] Subject: RE: Top posting solution
 ] Message-id:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ] X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
 ] X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0)

 [ Only someone condemned to support Windows users would want to
 understand the relationship between Outlook and OE in more
detail,
 so suffice it to say that the two are much more different than
one
 might expect from the shared name. ]

 Thanks for the clarification!  I was sleepy when I replied and
somehow
 missed the important yet subtle detail.  I do know the differences
of
 Outlook and OE.  I regularly have to read email formatted [or
should I
 say unformatted?] by Outlook 2003 for my $realjob and I've used
both
 Outlook and OE in the past.

 I just felt it was a bit funny to find a message in support of
 Outlook that exhibited exactly the sort of malformed output that
 Outlook is known for. What I wrote wasn't meant to be an offense
to
 JJB who's one of the regular posters and *does* contribute a lot
to
 helping others :-)

 ___
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Final closing comments on this thread.

I like many people who are FreeBSD users in one form or another have
to use the MS/Windows email clients in the process of earning a
living. This is just the reality of working today in the IT field. I
have always top posted to this list because that's how office
outlook worked. I had previously seen the fix for outlook express
and did not find out about the office outlook fix until the fix
author replied to my questions about his web site today.

I just though there might be more office outlook users on this list
who did not know about the bottom posting fix and posted the start
of this thread just as an innocent information transfer kind of
thing.

I was not implying any preference to top or bottom posting. I
personally prefer reading a thread composed of all bottom posting or
all top posting. When they are intermixed the flow is very hard to
follow. Since the majority of posts to this list are bottom posted I
though that now that I have a fix for my office outlook to bottom
post, I would start using it to do my part to make the threads I
post into easier to read and follow the flow of the conversation.











___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Tony Crockford

At 07:54 on Monday, 22 Mar 2004, Chris Pressey wrote:

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 01:50:14 -0500
Denny Jodeit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It boils down to a 'When in Rome, do as Romans do' situation. The
charter states no top posting.
I made sure to re-read the list charter when this thread started.  I
couldn't find a single mention of top posting.  The closest thing I
could find is that gross breaches of Netiquette are frowned upon but
not specifically enforced.
Perhaps the original poster meant point 9 on how to answer a question  
here:

http://www.lemis.com/questions.html#answer

seems pretty clear to me.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Kevin Stevens

On Mar 22, 2004, at 00:13, Tony Crockford wrote:

At 07:54 on Monday, 22 Mar 2004, Chris Pressey wrote:

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 01:50:14 -0500
Denny Jodeit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It boils down to a 'When in Rome, do as Romans do' situation. The
charter states no top posting.
I made sure to re-read the list charter when this thread started.  I
couldn't find a single mention of top posting.  The closest thing I
could find is that gross breaches of Netiquette are frowned upon 
but
not specifically enforced.
Perhaps the original poster meant point 9 on how to answer a 
question here:

http://www.lemis.com/questions.html#answer

seems pretty clear to me.
That's not the charter, though.  So far, in this interminable debate, 
we have a guy quoting an RFC as a standard, which explicitly states 
that it isn't a standard.  We have people quoting a document as the 
list charter, which isn't the charter.  And we have people blaming top 
posting on evil M$ software, which isn't true either - pine, for 
example, defaults to top posting when replying to messages.

If you want it in the charter, put it in the charter.  If you want it 
as an RFC, then get a RFC approved as a standard.  Until then, this is 
just a bunch of people whining that they want THEIR particular 
preferences honored.  Hell, I'd like my preferences honored too - don't 
start posting flames!  I don't expect anyone to honor that request, 
either.

KeS

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Bart Silverstrim

On Mar 21, 2004, at 7:35 PM, Lucas Holt wrote:

Aside from mailing lists, I tend to be a top poster.  I don't like 
when people leave the last 12 emails and then bottom post.. i have to  
scroll all day.
They should, in my opinion, delete extraneous stuff that doesn't have 
anything to do with the comment...

The other irritant is people who actually post in the middle of 
messages.  That breaks the FLOW as well.  After someone replies top 
or bottom its VERY hard to read.
How?  I see it as a conversational thread.  Here's what YOU said, 
here's what I have to say in reply...

I have a friend who seems to take the MS lazy approach to email.  I'll 
ask him three unrelated questions in the course of a reply to his mail. 
 He top posts the answers at the very top...I have no idea what in hell 
he's talking about.  Talk about breaking the flow of the message...

How about a new convention.  Delete everything but the last reply in 
the thread when you send to the list and say bottom post.
What if you're referring to what was referred to in flow to the 
previous message?  Why would you want to stop and wonder what the heck 
the previous person what talking about?

The bottom line is that people reply.  This list is here to help users 
with FreeBSD.  I'd take an answer to my questions in any format!
As long as it isn't something that you're puzzling over and have to ask 
several questions to get a final answer to out of it :-)

-Bart

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Michael W. Oliver

On 2004-03-21T23:26:47-0700, Rob M wrote:
 Forgive me if I am out of line here.  I am new to FreeBSD and this list, I 
 have been using both for about a week now after being with Windows since 3.1.  

Welcome!

 I have always been a top poster and a bottom feeder, I have never known it 
 was a big deal and every environment I have been in has top posted.  

Each community can certainly state it's own preferences, and it is
polite to follow those preferences.  It does tend to get hairy when you
are part of many different communities, each with it's own style that
you have to remember, lest you get chastised.  I think the FreeBSD
community is quite patient and understanding with new users, especially
on this particular list (questions).  On some of the other lists with
more developer interaction, the atmosphere can become somewhat heated...
it is sometimes fun to watch!

 I have been weary of posting as I dont want to irritate anyone by asking  
 something that is most likely simple to many of you.  I RTFM but just dont 
 get it sometimes so I lurk here and see if there is anything that pertains to 
 me or I go on the web and find it that way.  So far it has worked.

That is wonderful!  It is truly amazing how much information can be
found by searching the archives, googling, reading the FAQ, and just
reading the daily emails.  As I eluded to before, the 'questions' list
is the most user-friendly of the lists that I subscribe to.  Even so,
once you have lurked here for a couple of years, you will see the same
questions raised over and over again.  Some get ignored, some get a FAQ
pointer email, and some get a warm RTFM.

 Something struck a chord with me so I need clarification.

 On Sunday 21 March 2004 08:54 PM, Michael W. Oliver wrote:
 
  What I find comical about this topic (and it never ceases to recur every
  few months) is that the clueless who post, asking for clue, refuse to
  accept pointers on something so simple as email etiquette from the same
  people they assume will provide clue on so many other more complex
  issues!

 This seems arrogant to me, though it could be just that it is e-mail and I 
 cant see the person typing on the other end.  Also, if I am asking a question 
 about something I am having a hard time with then I would like an answer to 
 it, not pointers on something so simple as email etiquette from the same 
 person that is providing me a clue on my complex issue.  If I wanted to be 
 instructed on e-mail etiquette I would have asked.

I can see your point, but try to look at it from a less critical point
of view.  When you are provided with more information than you asked
for, such as email etiquette in this case, then count yourself as
fortunate that someone has taken the time to help you format email that
is sent to this list in such a way that it will garner the most
positive, helpful responses.

 Dont take that last comment out of line, I am sure with all of the same 
 answers you give over and over again that trying to get things in an even 
 format would be nice.  But it is part of the reason I am uneasy about asking 
 a question, not only do I feel ignorant because I am asking what is most 
 likely an easy question but I might irk someone if I dont format it in the 
 form of a question.

Like I said, the 'questions' list is the most user-friendly of the lists
that I am on.  You should not feel uneasy about posting to this list, as
long as you have done a certain amount of searching in the archives,
Google, etc. beforehand.  There are few things that get the 'questions'
community riled up as much as people who refuse to search for
information on their own, but would rather be spoon-fed.  As stated
earlier, you don't fall into this category.

 Secondly;

  In the end, why not just write like you speak?  In a verbal
  conversation, each party speaks in turn (in-line replies), provided they
  have something worthwhile to say on the given subject (trimming what
  isn't relevant), otherwise they keep their pie-hole shut (don't reply at
  all). 

 When I speak I dont give them back the same thing they just said to me and 
 then my reply, I just reply to them.  This means that in an e-mail I would 
 click reply, delete everything on the page, type my response and send it.  At 
 least it isn't a top post though, maybe we should just only post.

Ok, I see what you are trying to say, but think of it this way:

When you reply in-line, keeping the context of the previous email, you
aren't speaking the same text back to the original party, you are
quoting what they said so that your email can be taken in context with
the overall conversation, or at least the part of the conversation that
you are participating in (trimming).

 Sorry for the book.  By the way, I have gleaned something from all of you that 
 have posted.  Michael, I hope you don't feel like I am picking on you or 
 calling you out.  I am the new guy here and dont know how things work here, 
 smack me and show me the

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Benjamin Lutz

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:40:25 +1030
Greg 'groggy' Lehey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Heh.  That's human nature.  To quote:
 
What is actually happening, I am afraid, is that we all tell each
other and ourselves that software engineering techniques should be
improved considerably, because there is a crisis.  But there are a
few boundary conditions which apparently have to be satisfied:

1. We may not change our thinking habits.
2. We may not change our programming tools.
3. We may not change our hardware.
4. We may not change our tasks.
5. We may not change the organizational set-up
   in which the work has to be done.

Now under these five immutable boundary conditions, we have to try
to improve matters. This is utterly ridiculous.

Edsger W. Dijkstra, on receiving the ACM Turing Award in 1972

Great quote. I forwarded it to a friend, his reply cracked me up as
well (translated from german):

 Oh, he said as early as 1972?
 That the crisis still isn't over, that we are aware of. It's just
 that at the moment, things are looking like this:

   1. We are forced to change our thinking habits (Patterns, UML, ...)
   2. We are forced to replace all our tools (.net c#)
   3. We need new hardware (64bit anyone?)
   4. We need more flexibility (low level programmers are supposed
  to be good pixel artists)
   5. We desperately need a new company structure.

Greetings
Benjamin


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Jerry McAllister

 
 Forgive me if I am out of line here.  I am new to FreeBSD and this list, I 
 have been using both for about a week now after being with Windows since 3.1.  
 I have always been a top poster and a bottom feeder, I have never known it 
 was a big deal and every environment I have been in has top posted.  
 
 Secondly;
 
  In the end, why not just write like you speak?  In a verbal
  conversation, each party speaks in turn (in-line replies), provided they
  have something worthwhile to say on the given subject (trimming what
  isn't relevant), otherwise they keep their pie-hole shut (don't reply at
  all). 
 
 When I speak I dont give them back the same thing they just said to me and 
 then my reply, I just reply to them.  This means that in an e-mail I would 
 click reply, delete everything on the page, type my response and send it.  At 
 least it isn't a top post though, maybe we should just only post.

When you are posting to a list, there is a time lag and a distance that
needs to be overcome.   It is similar, but not quite the same as a face
to face conversation.   Retaining relevant material and interspersing
responses comes as close to a conversational, question and answer 
interchange as possible, given the medium of exchange.   It also helps
bring people in to the conversation who either are participating in
numerous conversations and need to be reminded of which one it is or
are new, but valuable, to the conversation.   

Anyway, what we have here are people coming to the list with questions
and problems and being informed by those with some experience on those
lists that it is easier to give help if add information if the responses
are interspersed.If you want to make is easy for those more experienced
people to get in to the conversation, you will do so.   If you don't
you will discourage their response.   There is no great moral issue
here.  It is an entirely practical consideration.

I do agree, by the way, with the idea of excising truly extraneous 
material.   But, just remember that other people may happen in to
the thread who have not seen it from the beginning or who have so
many things to look at that they can't remember which thread it it.
They may have potentially useful input that doesn't come out because
all of the information is no longer available.   

jerry

 
 Sorry for the book.  By the way, I have gleaned something from all of you that 
 have posted.  Michael, I hope you don't feel like I am picking on you or 
 calling you out.  I am the new guy here and dont know how things work here, 
 smack me and show me the way it should be here and I will comply.
 
 For the first time in an email I didnt top post...entirely.

Wasn't this fun.?

 
 -- 
 Rob
 
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Kirk Strauser

At 2004-03-22T02:34:36Z, Greg 'groggy' Lehey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 I'm missing something here.  Top posting, interleaved posting and bottom
 posting are not a function of the MUA, they're a function of the human
 making a conscious decision how to write a message.  What do *you* mean?

Correction: I said Kmail, but I was really thinking of Mozilla Thunderbird.

Thunderbird has preferences options for:

Automatically quote the original message when replying?

Then,

   Start my reply above the quote,
   Start my reply below the quote, or
   Select the quote

and place my signature

   below my reply (above the quote), or
   below the quote (recommended)

If you select the first option in each category, then you could say that
Thunderbird supports top posting by formatting new reply messages as:

--- cursor is positioned here
When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients.
If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients.
For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.

Kirk Strauser wrote:
 I think the main difference between top- and interleaved-posting is
 one of latency.  In an office environment, when you're replying
 within 2 minutes of receipt of a typically short message, top
 posting is reasonable.

In other words, your new reply message is automatically layed out as a top
posting message, and your cursor is positioned at the top of the editor and
waiting for you to start inserting text at the beginning.

You correctly state that posting style is not a function of the MUA, but in
some cases the MUA can make it easier or more likely for the user to post in
a certain manner.

 Well, I'll concede that it could barely be acceptable under such
 conditions.

Let me give another example.  Outlook 2003 can be configured so that when
the user receives a new email, it opens a short-lived popup window in the
bottom-right corner of the screen with the sender, subject, and first few
lines of the messages.  In my office, where many emails have message bodies
no larger than What's Bob's phone number?, there's a good chance that the
little preview popup will show the entire message being sent.  If the sender
is replying to a message you sent, and they top posted their one-line reply,
then you can read their reply without ever switching from the program you're
currently using to Outlook.

Of course, I'm using Kmail and/or Gnus on a Linux desktop, so I'm the
exception to that usage rule and haven't been lured into top posting.  We
also just rolled out a Jabber server that should replace most or all of
those one-line emails with instant messages.  Still, I think the pattern I
mentioned above is probably extremely common in Microsoft-oriented internal
office networks.

 On Usenet and mailing lists, where you see large, complex questions that
 get discussed over the span of days and weeks, interleaved posting is the
 only format that remotely makes sense.

 Sure.  Now how do you know in advance to which category each message
 belongs?  Where do you draw the line?  And what's the advantage of top
 posting?

If I'm typing in Gnus, then I'm reading newsgroups or mailing lists and
reply the correct way.  If I'm in Kmail, then I'm reading office email and
top post.  That's how *I* remember which method to use.  See above for *an*
advantage of top posting, that I grudgingly admit exists but only go along
with out of consideration to my co-workers.
-- 
Kirk Strauser


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Drew Tomlinson

On 3/21/2004 10:26 PM Rob M wrote:

Forgive me if I am out of line here.  I am new to FreeBSD and this list, I 
have been using both for about a week now after being with Windows since 3.1.  
I have always been a top poster and a bottom feeder, I have never known it 
was a big deal and every environment I have been in has top posted.  

I have been weary of posting as I dont want to irritate anyone by asking  
something that is most likely simple to many of you.  I RTFM but just dont 
get it sometimes so I lurk here and see if there is anything that pertains to 
me or I go on the web and find it that way.  So far it has worked.

Something struck a chord with me so I need clarification.

On Sunday 21 March 2004 08:54 pm, Michael W. Oliver wrote:

 

What I find comical about this topic (and it never ceases to recur every
few months) is that the clueless who post, asking for clue, refuse to
accept pointers on something so simple as email etiquette from the same
people they assume will provide clue on so many other more complex
issues!
   

This seems arrogant to me, though it could be just that it is e-mail and I 
cant see the person typing on the other end.  Also, if I am asking a question 
about something I am having a hard time with then I would like an answer to 
it, not pointers on something so simple as email etiquette from the same 
person that is providing me a clue on my complex issue.  If I wanted to be 
instructed on e-mail etiquette I would have asked.

Dont take that last comment out of line, I am sure with all of the same 
answers you give over and over again that trying to get things in an even 
format would be nice.  But it is part of the reason I am uneasy about asking 
a question, not only do I feel ignorant because I am asking what is most 
likely an easy question but I might irk someone if I dont format it in the 
form of a question.
 

Newbies are often referred to 
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html for an introduction 
to the culture on many lists such as this one.  I know it helped me 
and I hope it helps you.  Welcome!

snip

Drew

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Rob

At 09:09 22/03/2004 -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote:

When you are posting to a list, there is a time lag and a distance that
needs to be overcome.   It is similar, but not quite the same as a face
to face conversation.   Retaining relevant material and interspersing
responses comes as close to a conversational, question and answer
interchange as possible, given the medium of exchange.   It also helps
bring people in to the conversation who either are participating in
numerous conversations and need to be reminded of which one it is or
are new, but valuable, to the conversation.
I'm more of a lurker on the questions list, although I chime in when I see 
something I can help with.  I've been reading this through and I don't 
think anybody has pointed out one important topic so far, although touched 
upon by your point abut the time lag.  It is that these messages get 
archived!  Not just in various people's mail clients (I frequently search 
the ~13,000 messages in my archive when I encounter what might be a common 
issue) but on multiple websites around the globe.  Indeed, the FreeBSD 
website itself holds searchable archives of all the lists, which I am sure 
it probably recommends somewhere that you scan before asking.

So, when you have a problem, and you search the web for FreeBSD + your 
particular error message, you are very likely to come across a mailing list 
message. (I know I do anyway.)   This could very have been written 
yesterday, or six years ago, and you have likely have no idea of context.

Having the entire subject available in that first message you find - 
original problem, suggested solution, results of that solution, follow-ups, 
etc - means you have there an instant resource that is very valuable.

Having to trawl through a poorly threaded web-based archive to try and find 
out if it was the same problem you had when your search only gets to to the 
solution, (when the posters trim too much) or through masses of 
intermediate junk (when a topic gets big like this, and it's ALL quoted) is 
pretty hard work.

Certainly, interleaved or (at worst) bottom posted text makes life a great 
deal easier when coming across a post in isolation like this.  You can read 
through and you get the questions and answers, in context, in time-line order.

Now, for personal emails, I quite accept that everybody has a personal 
preference, and there is going to be a lot of when in Rome..  Certainly 
when there is little delay between message and reply, everybody knows the 
history of the dialogue, and nobody is going to stumble across it several 
years down the line, and you are all happy with the posting protocols, then 
it doesn't really matter does it?

As for MUA... My ex-employer (anybody want an IT support/installation 
engineer in the UK?) decided to move everybody and all our clients to MS 
Outlook and Exchange.  Because that's what people want.   And that's 
another topic

Rob.



___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Jerry McAllister

 
 
 When you are posting to a list, there is a time lag and a distance that
 needs to be overcome.   
 ...
 
 I'm more of a lurker on the questions list, although I chime in when I see 
 something I can help with.  I've been reading this through and I don't 
 think anybody has pointed out one important topic so far, although touched 
 upon by your point abut the time lag.  It is that these messages get 
 archived!  
 ... 
 So, when you have a problem, and you search the web for FreeBSD + your 
 particular error message, you are very likely to come across a mailing list 
 message. (I know I do anyway.)   This could very have been written 
 yesterday, or six years ago, and you have likely have no idea of context.
 
 Having the entire subject available in that first message you find - 
 original problem, suggested solution, results of that solution, follow-ups, 
 etc - means you have there an instant resource that is very valuable.
 
 Having to trawl through a poorly threaded web-based archive to try and find 
 out if it was the same problem you had when your search only gets to to the 
 solution, (when the posters trim too much) or through masses of 
 intermediate junk (when a topic gets big like this, and it's ALL quoted) is 
 pretty hard work.
 
 Certainly, interleaved or (at worst) bottom posted text makes life a great 
 deal easier when coming across a post in isolation like this.  You can read 
 through and you get the questions and answers, in context, in time-line order.

Good point.

jerry

 
 Rob.
 
 
 
 

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Kevin D. Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P.

Rob wrote:

As for MUA... My ex-employer (anybody want an IT support/installation 
engineer in the UK?) decided to move everybody and all our clients to 
MS Outlook and Exchange.  Because that's what people want.  


Gotta love PHB's!

And that's another topic


But not much of one.

KDK
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-22 Thread Alex de Kruijff

On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 12:13:49PM +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
 [Format *not* recovered--see http://www.lemis.com/email/email-format.html]
 
 RFC 1855 violation.
 
 On Saturday, 20 March 2004 at 20:53:18 +0100, Alex de Kruijff wrote:
  So far I only see argument agains top-posting.
 
 Why should the number of arguments count?  It's their validity.  But I
 think you're miscounting, possibly because of your emphasis on keeping
 the relevant text away from your reply.

Your ride about this volume doesn't count. Its just that when ppl say
that top-posting makes more sence (for them) then one migth think they
have any number of arugments and maybe they would like to share then.
I could have miscounted, yes.

-- 
Alex

Articles based on solutions that I use:
http://www.kruijff.org/alex/index.php?dir=docs/FreeBSD/
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Lucas Holt

Aside from mailing lists, I tend to be a top poster.  I don't like when 
people leave the last 12 emails and then bottom post.. i have to  
scroll all day.  The other irritant is people who actually post in the 
middle of messages.  That breaks the FLOW as well.  After someone 
replies top or bottom its VERY hard to read.

How about a new convention.  Delete everything but the last reply in 
the thread when you send to the list and say bottom post.  I can live 
with that as a top poster.  If I don't have to scroll all day to bottom 
post, its not a big deal.

The bottom line is that people reply.  This list is here to help users 
with FreeBSD.  I'd take an answer to my questions in any format!

Lucas Holt
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

FoolishGames.com  (Jewel Fan Site)
JustJournal.com (Free blogging)
'I try to think but nothing happens'
-- Homer Jay Simpson
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 19:35:48 -0500, Lucas Holt wrote:
 Aside from mailing lists, I tend to be a top poster.  I don't like
 when people leave the last 12 emails and then bottom post.. 

Bottom posting, where you leave the entire previous message, is only
marginally better than top posting.

 i have to scroll all day.

If the text is important, you should be reading it.  If it isn't, the
sender shouldn't have included it.

 The other irritant is people who actually post in the middle of
 messages.  That breaks the FLOW as well.

On the contrary, it shows you what the discussion is about.  In this
example, I'm answering your points one by one.  I'll repeat the whole
thing with top posting.  Tell me if it's easier to read.

 After someone replies top or bottom its VERY hard to read.

Agreed, mixing styles is the worst of the lot.  That's a very good
reason to insist on one style.

 How about a new convention.  Delete everything but the last reply in
 the thread when you send to the list and say bottom post.  I can
 live with that as a top poster.  If I don't have to scroll all day
 to bottom post, its not a big deal.

What's wrong with the convention we have?  I'll answer this message a
third time in the style you propose.  Tell me if it's easier to read.

Greg
--
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

The following message is the second in a series of three, intended to
show why top-posting is bad.  See the previous message (Message ID
[EMAIL PROTECTED]) for a version that I
consider understandable.

Bottom posting, where you leave the entire previous message, is only
marginally better than top posting.

If the text is important, you should be reading it.  If it isn't, the
sender shouldn't have included it.

On the contrary, it shows you what the discussion is about.  In this
example, I'm answering your points one by one.  I'll repeat the whole
thing with top posting.  Tell me if it's easier to read.

Agreed, mixing styles is the worst of the lot.  That's a very good
reason to insist on one style.

What's wrong with the convention we have?  I'll answer this message a
third time in the style you propose.  Tell me if it's easier to read.

Greg

On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 19:35:48 -0500, Lucas Holt wrote:
 Aside from mailing lists, I tend to be a top poster.  I don't like when
 people leave the last 12 emails and then bottom post.. i have to
 scroll all day.  The other irritant is people who actually post in the
 middle of messages.  That breaks the FLOW as well.  After someone
 replies top or bottom its VERY hard to read.

 How about a new convention.  Delete everything but the last reply in
 the thread when you send to the list and say bottom post.  I can live
 with that as a top poster.  If I don't have to scroll all day to bottom
 post, its not a big deal.

 The bottom line is that people reply.  This list is here to help users
 with FreeBSD.  I'd take an answer to my questions in any format!


 Lucas Holt
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 FoolishGames.com  (Jewel Fan Site)
 JustJournal.com (Free blogging)

 'I try to think but nothing happens'
 -- Homer Jay Simpson

--
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

The following message is the second in a series of three, intended to
show why bottom-posting (where a reply is completely separate from the
original message) is bad.  See the first message (Message ID
[EMAIL PROTECTED]) for a version that I
consider understandable.

On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 19:35:48 -0500, Lucas Holt wrote:
 Aside from mailing lists, I tend to be a top poster.  I don't like when 
 people leave the last 12 emails and then bottom post.. i have to  
 scroll all day.  The other irritant is people who actually post in the 
 middle of messages.  That breaks the FLOW as well.  After someone 
 replies top or bottom its VERY hard to read.
 
 How about a new convention.  Delete everything but the last reply in 
 the thread when you send to the list and say bottom post.  I can live 
 with that as a top poster.  If I don't have to scroll all day to bottom 
 post, its not a big deal.
 
 The bottom line is that people reply.  This list is here to help users 
 with FreeBSD.  I'd take an answer to my questions in any format!
 
 
 Lucas Holt
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 FoolishGames.com  (Jewel Fan Site)
 JustJournal.com (Free blogging)
 
 'I try to think but nothing happens'
 -- Homer Jay Simpson

Bottom posting, where you leave the entire previous message, is only
marginally better than top posting.

If the text is important, you should be reading it.  If it isn't, the
sender shouldn't have included it.

On the contrary, it shows you what the discussion is about.  In this
example, I'm answering your points one by one.  I'll repeat the whole
thing with top posting.  Tell me if it's easier to read.

Agreed, mixing styles is the worst of the lot.  That's a very good
reason to insist on one style.

What's wrong with the convention we have?  I'll answer this message a
third time in the style you propose.  Tell me if it's easier to read.

Greg
-- 
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

On Monday, 22 March 2004 at 11:13:37 +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
 On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 19:35:48 -0500, Lucas Holt wrote:
 Aside from mailing lists, I tend to be a top poster.  I don't like
 when people leave the last 12 emails and then bottom post..

 Bottom posting, where you leave the entire previous message, is only
 marginally better than top posting.

On Monday, 22 March 2004 at 11:15:14 +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
 The following message is the second in a series of three, intended to
 show why top-posting is bad.  See the previous message (Message ID
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]) for a version that I
 consider understandable.

On Monday, 22 March 2004 at 11:16:07 +1030, Greg Lehey wrote:
 The following message is the second in a series of three, intended to
 show why bottom-posting (where a reply is completely separate from the
 original message) is bad.  See the first message (Message ID
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]) for a version that I
 consider understandable.

You might also like to count the length of the three messages.  The
one with the interleaved answers is the shortest.  This is because I
trimmed unnecessary text.

Greg
--
When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients.
If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients.
For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread uidzero


Bottom posting, where you leave the entire previous message, is only
marginally better than top posting.
If the text is important, you should be reading it.  If it isn't, the
sender shouldn't have included it.
On the contrary, it shows you what the discussion is about.  In this
example, I'm answering your points one by one.  I'll repeat the whole
thing with top posting.  Tell me if it's easier to read.
Agreed, mixing styles is the worst of the lot.  That's a very good
reason to insist on one style.
What's wrong with the convention we have?  I'll answer this message a
third time in the style you propose.  Tell me if it's easier to read.
 

Greg,

This one just gets too long after a thread of 5 or more. I can relate to 
the others but, I just don't read any of the thread to start with if the 
subject or the original post doesn't concern me. :) That's just me though.

Michael

--
Michael D. Whities
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.one-arm.com
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread uidzero

Lucas Holt wrote:

Aside from mailing lists, I tend to be a top poster.  I don't like 
when people leave the last 12 emails and then bottom post.. i have to  
scroll all day.  The other irritant is people who actually post in the 
middle of messages.  That breaks the FLOW as well.  After someone 
replies top or bottom its VERY hard to read.

How about a new convention.  Delete everything but the last reply in 
the thread when you send to the list and say bottom post.  I can live 
with that as a top poster.  If I don't have to scroll all day to 
bottom post, its not a big deal.

The bottom line is that people reply.  This list is here to help users 
with FreeBSD.  I'd take an answer to my questions in any format!

I'm the same way. I take out everything but the last post. (including 
any .sigs) As for reading them any other way, I like them like I'm doing 
now or sectioned off to answer the questions or what not as they come down.

eg...

Original E-mail:  Question: Is this proper?

Next e-mail: Answer: Sure, IMHO

Original E-mail:  Question: Are you sure?

Next e-mail: Answer:  of course.

Otherwise, hey everyone. I'm Michael and I'm new to the list. Been using 
Linux si
nce 98 and for the past 5 days, I've done nothing but FreeBSD.

bigbsd~ uname -a
FreeBSD bigbsd.one-arm.com 4.9-STABLE FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE #0: Sat Mar 20 
15:14:02 CST
2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/FW-BSD  i386
bigbsd~ df -h
FilesystemSize   Used  Avail Capacity  Mounted on
/dev/da0s1a   126M59M57M51%/
/dev/da0s1f   252M  10.0K   232M 0%/tmp
/dev/da0s1g15G   9.6G   4.4G68%/usr
/dev/da0s1e   252M34M   198M15%/var
procfs4.0K   4.0K 0B   100%/proc
/dev/ad4s1 56G   690M51G 1%/mnt/storage
bigbsd~

I'm not quite brave enough to go to 5.2.1. I must say, in the last 5 
days, I've learned more about FreeBSD than I really learned about Linux 
since '98.

Thanks,

Michael

--
Michael D. Whities
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.one-arm.com
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Matt Coe, CCNA

uidzero wrote:

What's wrong with the convention we have?  I'll answer this message a
third time in the style you propose.  Tell me if it's easier to read.
This one just gets too long after a thread of 5 or more. I can relate 
to the others but, I just don't read any of the thread to start with 
if the subject or the original post doesn't concern me. :) That's just 
me though.
Not if the replier (is that even a word? It is now! Ha!) edits carefully 
for context. Leave out the bits of old messages that no longer relate to 
the discussion at hand and your replies should be nice and coherent. 
I've been practicing that for years.

--
Matt Coe, CCNA
Member-At-Large, Dalhousie University CS Society Fall 2003
'Ford! There's an infinite number of monkeys outside who want to talk
to us about this script for Hamlet they've worked out.'
 -- DNA, 'The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy', Arthur Philip Dent
Sick of long-distance bills? Get Skype! www.skype.com

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread JJB

So unix mail clients bottom post  by design and MS/outlook tops
posts by design.
So is there some MS/Outlook config option to change it to bottom
post?
DO Unix mail clients have some option to config them to top post?

SO here we are right back at the starting point.
The 2 different groups have to just learn to deal with the list
being
populated with both top and bottom posting intermingled throughout
the thread.

No amount of complaining are going to change these  facts, so suck
it up, and move on.

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Shaun T. Erickson

 ... both top and bottom ...

All this talk of top and bottom is making me blush and breathe heavy,
LOL (j/k). :-)

Perhaps this dead horse has been sufficiently beaten, that we can let it
Rest In Peace, and move on? :-)

-ste
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

[Format recovered--see http://www.lemis.com/email/email-format.html]

Long/short syndrome.

On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 20:09:17 -0500, JJB wrote:
 So unix mail clients bottom post  by design and MS/outlook tops
 posts by design.

No, that's not a question of design: it's the way you use them.

 So is there some MS/Outlook config option to change it to bottom
 post?

Well, it would be nice to have it to interface to an editor.  That
seems not to be possible, which completely baffles me.

 DO Unix mail clients have some option to config them to top post?

No.

 SO here we are right back at the starting point.  The 2 different
 groups have to just learn to deal with the list being populated with
 both top and bottom posting intermingled throughout the thread.

In fact, you're bringing up another point.  Microsoft MUAs appear to
be so difficult to use that many people take the path of least
resistance, leaving a trail of mutilation at the end of the message.

 No amount of complaining are going to change these facts, so suck it
 up, and move on.

They're not facts.  No amount of claiming will make them facts.

Greg
--
When replying to this message, please take care not to mutilate the
original text.  
For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/email.html
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Louis LeBlanc

On 03/21/04 08:17 PM, Shaun T. Erickson sat at the `puter and typed:
  ... both top and bottom ...
 
 All this talk of top and bottom is making me blush and breathe heavy,
 LOL (j/k). :-)

ROFL.  Thank you dearly.  That one comment has just made this whole
thread worthwhile!

 Perhaps this dead horse has been sufficiently beaten, that we can let it
 Rest In Peace, and move on? :-)

I doubt it.  This thread will be going long after this horse is no
longer recognizeable as anything but a puddle of primordial ooze.

L
-- 
Louis LeBlanc   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fully Funded Hobbyist, KeySlapper Extrordinaire :)
http://www.keyslapper.org ԿԬ

When I woke up this morning, my girlfriend asked if I had slept well.
I said, No, I made a few mistakes.
-- Steven Wright
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Gary

Hi JJB,

--On Sunday, March 21, 2004 8:09 PM -0500 JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

So is there some MS/Outlook config option to change it to bottom
post?
Outlook fix http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/

OE fix http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

--
Gary
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Scott Ballantyne

Top posting is irritating. So is scrolling through 20Mb of unedited text
to get to a one line response, which is often Yes, I've seen this too.
Spelling flames are irritating too. And the most irritating of all is
reading messages on a mailing list which deal only with issues of
netiquette.

What ever happened to the very sound advice that used to be preached
that such messages should be sent privately, to the perpetrator of the
breach, rather than broadcast to the many readers of freebsd-questions
who are more interested in getting freebsd answers than a lesson in
netiquette?

sdb
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 20:44:12 -0500, Scott Ballantyne wrote:
 Top posting is irritating. So is scrolling through 20Mb of unedited text
 to get to a one line response, which is often Yes, I've seen this too.
 Spelling flames are irritating too. And the most irritating of all is
 reading messages on a mailing list which deal only with issues of
 netiquette.

Nothing makes you read them.

 What ever happened to the very sound advice that used to be preached
 that such messages should be sent privately, to the perpetrator of
 the breach, rather than broadcast to the many readers of
 freebsd-questions who are more interested in getting freebsd answers
 than a lesson in netiquette?

It's still there.  But obviously this matter is of interest to enough
people that it's worth discussing on the list, especially since it
influences the likely success of a post to the list.  If it doesn't
interest you, do what you do with other messages that don't interest
you: delete them.

Greg
--
When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients.
If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients.
For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Kirk Strauser

At 2004-03-22T01:23:45Z, Greg 'groggy' Lehey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 DO Unix mail clients have some option to config them to top post?

 No.

Kmail, for one, offers that as an option.  I started doing that at work
after my boss explained that interleaved-trimmed posting is difficult to
read.

I think the main difference between top- and interleaved-posting is one of
latency.  In an office environment, when you're replying within 2 minutes of
receipt of a typically short message, top posting is reasonable.  On Usenet
and mailing lists, where you see large, complex questions that get discussed
over the span of days and weeks, interleaved posting is the only format that
remotely makes sense.
-- 
Kirk Strauser

94 outdated ports on the box,
 94 outdated ports.
 Portupgrade one, an hour 'til done,
 82 outdated ports on the box.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 20:27:57 -0600, Kirk Strauser wrote:
 At 2004-03-22T01:23:45Z, Greg 'groggy' Lehey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 DO Unix mail clients have some option to config them to top post?

 No.

 Kmail, for one, offers that as an option.  I started doing that at work
 after my boss explained that interleaved-trimmed posting is difficult to
 read.

I'm missing something here.  Top posting, interleaved posting and
bottom posting are not a function of the MUA, they're a function of
the human making a conscious decision how to write a message.  What do
*you* mean?

 I think the main difference between top- and interleaved-posting is
 one of latency.  In an office environment, when you're replying
 within 2 minutes of receipt of a typically short message, top
 posting is reasonable.

Well, I'll concede that it could barely be acceptable under such
conditions.

 On Usenet and mailing lists, where you see large, complex questions
 that get discussed over the span of days and weeks, interleaved
 posting is the only format that remotely makes sense.

Sure.  Now how do you know in advance to which category each message
belongs?  Where do you draw the line?  And what's the advantage of top
posting?

Greg
--
When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients.
If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients.
For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Jud


On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 13:04:36 +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 20:27:57 -0600, Kirk Strauser wrote:
  At 2004-03-22T01:23:45Z, Greg 'groggy' Lehey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
  I think the main difference between top- and interleaved-posting is
  one of latency.  In an office environment, when you're replying
  within 2 minutes of receipt of a typically short message, top
  posting is reasonable.
 
 Well, I'll concede that it could barely be acceptable under such
 conditions.
 
  On Usenet and mailing lists, where you see large, complex questions
  that get discussed over the span of days and weeks, interleaved
  posting is the only format that remotely makes sense.
 
 Sure.  Now how do you know in advance to which category each message
 belongs?  Where do you draw the line?  And what's the advantage of top
 posting?

The very last thing I ever thought I would find myself doing is defending
the efficacy of top posting under any circumstances, but, well, here it
is:

Lotus Notes (at least the versions I've been using at work the last 6 or
so years) is configured to top-post, and a good thing, too.  As more
important problems move up the chain of responsibility at work, you deal
with people who have less and less time to spare.  They will want to see
the couple-of-sentence summary written by the person immediately below
them in the chain of command.  Depending on what that summary says, they
might want to check further (lower).  In rare, extraordinary situations,
they might read all the way to the last message (typically written by the
first person of managerial level to see the problem).  For these folks,
interleaving or bottom-posting would unnecessarily increase
information-gathering and decision-making time, significant if you are
making hundreds of critical decisions each day.  (Yes, there are valid
criticisms of decision-making based on this sort of
whispering-down-the-line information.)

How do you know in advance?  Where do you draw the line?  Pretty simple
in practice, really, at least in my particular situation.  At work (where
there is no choice anyway due to Lotus Notes' configuration),
particularly when writing to managerial levels above me, I would not
hesitate to top-post; even if interleaving were possible, I might think
twice about it.  For mailing lists and newsgroups, where threads can run
as long as value and interest dictate, ISTM that top-posting is a PITA at
best, death to understanding at worst.

Jud
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Michael W. Oliver

On 2004-03-21T19:33:58-0600, Gary wrote:
 Hi JJB,

 --On Sunday, March 21, 2004 8:09 PM -0500 JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 So is there some MS/Outlook config option to change it to bottom
 post?

 Outlook fix http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/

 OE fix http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

Gary,

Thanks so much for posting these links!  Whether or not those who post
email from sub-par MUAs like Outlook and OE will take heed and make use
of these very useful fixes remains to be seen.

What I find comical about this topic (and it never ceases to recur every
few months) is that the clueless who post, asking for clue, refuse to
accept pointers on something so simple as email etiquette from the same
people they assume will provide clue on so many other more complex
issues!

I am not an ass-kisser of any sort, but I can tell you that I have
learned a lot from reading Greg's site about email posting, and
listening to his (and other's) logic in the matter.

In the end, why not just write like you speak?  In a verbal
conversation, each party speaks in turn (in-line replies), provided they
have something worthwhile to say on the given subject (trimming what
isn't relevant), otherwise they keep their pie-hole shut (don't reply at
all).  Most of us read and write English from left to right, top to
bottom, so why is it so much to ask to follow the same guidelines that
are followed with verbal speech?

Using a poor MUA isn't an excuse, certainly not after this very useful
post by Gary!

For those on high, please forgive my entrance into this thread.

-- 
Mike
perl -e 'print unpack(u,88V]N=%C=\!I;F9O(EN(AE861EG,*);'



pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 22:41:12 -0500, Jud wrote:

 On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 13:04:36 +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 20:27:57 -0600, Kirk Strauser wrote:
 At 2004-03-22T01:23:45Z, Greg 'groggy' Lehey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 [snip]
 I think the main difference between top- and interleaved-posting is
 one of latency.  In an office environment, when you're replying
 within 2 minutes of receipt of a typically short message, top
 posting is reasonable.

 Well, I'll concede that it could barely be acceptable under such
 conditions.

 On Usenet and mailing lists, where you see large, complex questions
 that get discussed over the span of days and weeks, interleaved
 posting is the only format that remotely makes sense.

 Sure.  Now how do you know in advance to which category each message
 belongs?  Where do you draw the line?  And what's the advantage of top
 posting?

 The very last thing I ever thought I would find myself doing is defending
 the efficacy of top posting under any circumstances, but, well, here it
 is:

 Lotus Notes (at least the versions I've been using at work the last 6 or
 so years) is configured to top-post,

Ah.  This is something different, but at least I understand now.  Yes,
I've used Lotus Notes too.  It drove me mad.  The issue here is that
Lotus is not capable of quoting text; it simply appends it.  But it is
possible to bottom post.  The result is that most recipients don't
bother to look for it; they think it's a null reply.  In my view, this
is an example of completely broken communications.

 and a good thing, too.

I strongly disagree.

 As more important problems move up the chain of responsibility at
 work, you deal with people who have less and less time to spare.

So you barrage them with the entire previous communications history
instead of the relevant parts?  See my three examples from a few hours
ago.  Which was shortest?

 They will want to see the couple-of-sentence summary written by the
 person immediately below them in the chain of command.

Apart from the fact that such people make up only a small number of
the users, this has nothing to do with the MUA.  This is a matter of
their subordinates knowing how to express themselves.

 Depending on what that summary says, they might want to check
 further (lower).  In rare, extraordinary situations, they might read
 all the way to the last message (typically written by the first
 person of managerial level to see the problem).

This is a very unusual situation.  It would be easier for them to ask
a question and ignore the attachments, which is almost certainly what
they do.

 For these folks, interleaving or bottom-posting would unnecessarily
 increase information-gathering and decision-making time,

This is an assertion.  I would disagree (WRT interleaving).

 significant if you are making hundreds of critical decisions each
 day.

I don't make hundreds of critical decisions every day, but I receive
thousands of mail messages.  I prefer interleaved mail exactly because
I can address it faster.  When I used Lotus, I found it took about 20
times as long to process a message as it did with a real MUA.  Part of
that was the lack of an editor.

 (Yes, there are valid criticisms of decision-making based on this
 sort of whispering-down-the-line information.)

I do agree that the people at the top should only get what they need.
That's normal good business organization.  Where we differ is how to
achieve this information.

 How do you know in advance?  Where do you draw the line?  Pretty
 simple in practice, really, at least in my particular situation.  At
 work (where there is no choice anyway due to Lotus Notes'
 configuration), particularly when writing to managerial levels above
 me, I would not hesitate to top-post;

Yes, I ended up doing that after a number of people didn't see my
replies :-(

 even if interleaving were possible, I might think twice about it.

I wouldn't, not for a second.

Greg
--
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Greg 'groggy' Lehey

On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 22:54:56 -0500, Michael W. Oliver wrote:
 On 2004-03-21T19:33:58-0600, Gary wrote:
 Hi JJB,

 --On Sunday, March 21, 2004 8:09 PM -0500 JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 So is there some MS/Outlook config option to change it to bottom
 post?

 Outlook fix http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/

 OE fix http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

 Thanks so much for posting these links!

Agreed, this looks excellent.

 Whether or not those who post email from sub-par MUAs like Outlook
 and OE will take heed and make use of these very useful fixes
 remains to be seen.

I'll certainly put them in my How to live with Outlook pages.

 What I find comical about this topic (and it never ceases to recur
 every few months) is that the clueless who post, asking for clue,
 refuse to accept pointers on something so simple as email etiquette
 from the same people they assume will provide clue on so many other
 more complex issues!

Heh.  That's human nature.  To quote:

   What is actually happening, I am afraid, is that we all tell each
   other and ourselves that software engineering techniques should be
   improved considerably, because there is a crisis.  But there are a few
   boundary conditions which apparently have to be satisfied:
   
   1. We may not change our thinking habits.
   2. We may not change our programming tools.
   3. We may not change our hardware.
   4. We may not change our tasks.
   5. We may not change the organizational set-up
  in which the work has to be done.
   
   Now under these five immutable boundary conditions, we have to try to
   improve matters. This is utterly ridiculous.
   
   Edsger W. Dijkstra, on receiving the ACM Turing Award in 1972

I've just added this to the FreeBSD fortunes database.

Greg
--
When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients.
If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients.
For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html
Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen.
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Gary

On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 03:40:25PM +1030 or thereabouts, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
 On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 22:54:56 -0500, Michael W. Oliver wrote:
  On 2004-03-21T19:33:58-0600, Gary wrote:
  --On Sunday, March 21, 2004 8:09 PM -0500 JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  So is there some MS/Outlook config option to change it to bottom
  post?

  Outlook fix http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/

  OE fix http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

  Thanks so much for posting these links!
 
 Agreed, this looks excellent.

wonderful, thanks guys... I found this a long time ago from another list,
and it certainly help there. 
 
 I'll certainly put them in my How to live with Outlook pages.

ah, thanks Greg, I was going to ask you to do so, and you beat me to it.
g 
 
  What I find comical about this topic (and it never ceases to recur
  every few months) is that the clueless who post, asking for clue,
  refuse to accept pointers on something so simple as email etiquette
  from the same people they assume will provide clue on so many other
  more complex issues!
 
 Heh.  That's human nature.  To quote:
snip 

cracked me up... great quote. 


-- 
Gary

Your E-Mail has been returned due to insufficient voltage
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Top posting

2004-03-21 Thread Eric F Crist

On Sunday 21 March 2004 08:46 pm, you wrote:
 On Sun, 2004-03-21 at 21:01, Eric F Crist wrote:
  Also,  it's nice to see some people who don't post a whole lot speak up
  about something.  To all those, welcome!

 That's rather the problem. People who don't know much about unix are
 perfectly happy to chime in about spelling or top posting, where
 expertise is relatively easy to acquire. Pretty soon, the list stops
 being about freebsd.

On the contrary.  I believe there are a lot of people on the list that are 
very knowledgable that don't speak up very often.  Perhaps they are here to 
simply see what other people are having problems with, perhaps they're here, 
as you say, with little knowledge.  Personally, I don't care.  I'm happy to 
be a part of a community that's willing to help eachother.

I feel this particular thread is an issue that could help many.  Maybe my 
knowledge or opinion doesn't mean much to you, buy perhaps to others.  I, 
personally, ignore HTML and incorrectly formatted messages.  If I'm 
personally interested in a thread, I will read it, regardless of format, but 
not if I'm simply trying to help a fellow BSDer out.  If Joe Shmoe (sorry if 
that person really exists) composes an email that contains 18 previous 
messages and top-posts, amongst other things, I'm FAR less likely to read 
that message, much less reply.  I'm anal enough to even edit those stupid 
forwards all of us get from our friends that are a combination of attachments 
and copy/paste so that it only contains the pertinent info.  Mind you, this 
is only on the RARE email I feel is good enough to forward on myself, which 
is hardly ever random junk.

Please allow us, without harrassement, to discuss issues people on this list 
find important.  As Greg said earlier, if you don't like this thread, simply 
delete it.  We're not making you read it.  It hardly uses enough bandwidth 
for you to stress over.

Have a great night, or morning, or whichever.
-- 
Eric F Crist
AdTech Integrated Systems, Inc
(612) 998-3588


pgp0.pgp
Description: signature

1 2 >

1 - 100 of 131 matches

Mail list logo