Okay, Okay, except:
I think it is bad form, both in terms of style and meaning, to have a
signature *below* quotations when those quotes fall at the bottom and
are not interspersed with fresh comments.
So, if the newest message looked like:
<quote>
<response>
<quote>
<response>
then it would make sense to have a sig at the bottom of the whole
thing. But if the message looks like:
<response>
<quote>
which is often appropriate when there is an ongoing dialog or new
developments which are being tracked, then it makes little sense to
have the responder's sig at the bottom of what could be several levels
of other people's quotes.
JN
On Saturday, June 08, 2002, Allie C Martin wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'd think that the *only* reason for quoting something is if it's
> worth reading and the recipient may wish to read it to understand the
> context of your reply. I almost always read some part of the
> quotations and enjoy messages that have the reply material nested with
> the quotations. It makes for a much smoother read. Why quote it with
> the knowledge that it may become unreadable for the recipient? This
> doesn't make sense in my opinion. <shrug>
> Your signature should really be at the end of the message.
> If the user wishes to do multiple level quoting then your method makes
> it difficult for the recipient who wishes to reply.
________________________________________________________
Current Ver: 1.60q
FAQ : http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug Reports: https://bt.ritlabs.com
