Saluton Tony :) On Sun 29 Mar 2009 20:36 +0200, Tony Mechelynck <[email protected]> dixit: > On 29/03/09 17:49, Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado wrote: >> I must say that while this list is, by far, the most polite and >> civiliced group I've ever been subscribed to, it is the most >> difficult to read, too: I have to agree with you. My main problem is >> with top posting and untrimmed quotations. > > Maybe emails would be more homogeneously formatted if we > systematically gave scathing dessing-downs to anyone deviating from > the rules. But do we want to? I mean, what do we prefer? Civilized > language or adherence to the rules? I'm not sure we can have both.
I don't know, but I want to think we can have "almost both". I mean, a polite mailing list and high degree of adherence to the rules. But maybe you're right, because I've seen much stricter groups with people calling names, for example. Well, I prefer good manners in that case. I don't believe in a strong enforcement of rules, because in general I don't believe in enforcing: I prefer people doing things because they think they're right, not because they fear someone will punish them otherwise. This is the reason why I don't post the list "rules" (I don't think that an official set of rules exist at all for this list, anyway) from time to time. It doesn't exactly bother me what people do in this list as long as there is respect, politeness and good karma ;) This said, I just can't afford to read top-posting threads because *for me* that quoting is unnatural and more time consuming. The same applies to messages with confusing subjects, confusing text, etc. If I have some spare time, I actually *do* read those messages, too, but when I'm in a hurry I tend to read and answer messages which are properly trimmed, have good subjects, etc. And by no means I'm implying that *my* messages are well trimmed, well quoted, well written or have sensible subjects, because I doubt it ;) >> I don't see any offence in what you say: it's your time. I do more or >> less the same, because my time is limited, so I delete without >> reading any message with four pages of quotations, topposting or >> both, except if coming from a couple of particular members whose >> answers are always worth the extra effort. If someone doesn't spend >> time in their messages, I don't see why I should spend time reading >> them. It's not a matter of offending or punishing anyone, it's just >> that time is not free. > > :-) Whether you read all posts, just those that follow the list's > posting standards, or just those whose subjects draw your attention, > is entirely your choice. Nothing offensive in that. But people should > realize that clear subject lines, clear text, and adherence to the > list's posting and trimming standards, all increase your chances of > getting a prompt, useful and to-the-point answer. Exactly: you get some increase in your chances of getting help. -- Raúl "DervishD" Núñez de Arenas Coronado Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to... RAmen! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
