While I have seen the aversion to MS products on this list, I do like the way Outlook 
allows me to sort by subject then by received date/time.  It is "smart enough" to 
handle the replies as part of a subject flow.

Usually most of the threads are in blocks in the intray.  I don't know if other 
products allow this.

The sorting does go astray when someone changes the subject - so please restrain 
yourselves.

My 2

Jef Lee
IT Vision
Level 3 Kirin Centre, 15 Ogilvie Road, APPLECROSS, WA 6153
Tel: (08) 9315 7000  Fax: (08) 9315 7088
P O Box 881, Canning Bridge, WA 6153
A.C.N. 068 914 867


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray DeGennaro at 
Eaglerock IS
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 11:47 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] The aforementioned and promised NAG about OVERQUOTING


>Susan,
>    Curious, I find the reverse to be true. Since I usually read in
>threads, I find that having to scroll through the last part to get 
>to the current part mildly annoying.

The information flow problem is that messages, especially email, 
don't always arrive and sort threaded.  This is problem is further 
compounded because somebody could reply today to a message that was 
deleted from your Inbox or expired from your news server days or even 
weeks ago.  Without interposting, you have no idea where the reply 
fits into the thread.  If you are a reader that typically reads 
through an entire thread, when it's essentially dead, and don't mind 
the occasional reply that's out of place because somebody has their 
clock out of sync, or the time zone set incorrectly, then that's fine 
for you.  But top-posting still makes things more difficult for just 
about everybody else.

The byte flow problem, is the one that directly affects Cliff and the 
digests.  Unfortunately, 99.9999% of Top-Posters neglect to trim the 
quoted message to the relevant material.  That wastes huge amounts of 
bandwidth.  Another thing to remember here, is that Usenet and email 
are international, and that the US is pretty much the only place 
where almost everybody can get internet access without per-byte or 
per-minute charges.  Please note I typed "almost everybody" -- There 
are still places in the US where there are no local access numbers 
and people have to pay per-minute line charges in order to access 
their "unlimited" internet accounts.

There really are no valid reasons to top-post, but there are plenty 
of valid reasons to inter-post and trim the quoted material.  That's 
why it's been a flameable action on Usenet for over twenty years. 
Top-posting has only become more common in recent years because OE 
and a few other email/newsreader hybrids (that really don't do either 
well) make it tough to reply correctly and newbies are showing up 
everyday, not just in the first couple of weeks in September. 
Insisting on top-posting and not trimming the quoted material, 
especially when there's replies that have already been right-posted 
(aka inter-posted), I hate to say it, is just plain rude and self 
serving.  Please take a moment and read the material listed in the 
two links previously provided.  If you missed them, here they are 
again:
    <http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html>
    <http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting>


Ray


-- 
.=================================================================.
| =-=-=-=-=-=-= Eagle Rock Information Systems Corp =-=-=-=-=-=-= |
| -=-=-=-=-=-=- web and database business solutions -=-=-=-=-=-=- |
|   <http://www.eriscorp.com>        <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   |
|Midwest Regional Office: 815-547-0662 (voice) 503-905-8153 (eFax)|
.=================================================================.
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Reply via email to