Guys, Please take this off-list.
Thanks, Wez @ RealVNC Ltd. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MontrealPaul > Sent: 04 May 2006 04:14 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: On "netiquette" [was: Indented replys] > > On 5/2/06, Jaroslaw Rafa raj-at-ap.krakow.pl wrote: > > ............ napisal(a): > > > As one who normally uses e-mail as a rapid and expedient form of > > > communication, where dialogists generally remember what > was just said > > > and are immediately interested in what is new, I am accustomed to > > > seeing newer material at the top, which is how most > mainstream e-mail > > > clients (that I have used, anyway) format it. > > > > Hm... I'm pretty sure that "mainstream" here means "created > by Microsoft" or > > "following the Microsoft way", because it's Microsoft who > first introduced > > replying at the top, and then so many people adopted it > :-(. But for me, > > when we speak about Internet software, "mainstream" are > people who still > > remember what was the Internet before Microsoft ;-), and > the software > > created by them. This software always puts new text below the quote. > > Yes, Jaroslaw, you are correct. Micro$oft, like it or not, is the > author (or, at least, current vendor) of the most widely used > (mainstream) e-mail clients. > And please don't lecture me about "people who still remember when". I > was BBS'ing before the Internet was invented. My first computer had 2K > of RAM, and reset whenever the refrigerator kicked in! > > > > There is generally not > > > enough time to pick and sort through previous statements > and edit it > > > for a statement-for-statement chronology, though I often > do so when > > > > In this case, it's better not to quote at all. If both > parties remember what > > was just said and are interested only in what's new, I > don't see any reason > > for quoting - and then the "top" or "bottom" problem > disappears. And the > > messages don't have unneccessary long "tails" consisiting > of old text. > > Again - and in the context of day-to-day office e-mail, not lists like > this - it's a question of time. People usually, in the course of > typical e-mail exchange, want to fire off a quick reply, not "waste" > time (yes, that's debatable) editing, even if that means highlighting > and deleting the text below, but rather just leave it there. Go with > the flo, bro! :-) > > All that said - and this is the MOST important (and, I hope, last) > thing I want to say to you: These quotes to which you are so > vehemently objecting relate NOT to the netiquette of lists and forums, > but rather to the way "typical" e-mail is conducted. If you were to > read the entire message, you would see that I fully agree with editing > for context, when in forums such as this, as I am doing here. > (please refer back to > http://www.realvnc.com/pipermail/vnc-list/2006-May/054790.html) > > > Spam, wirusy, spyware... masz do6f? Jest alternatywa! > > http://www.firefox.pl/ --- http://www.thunderbird.pl/ > > Szybciej. #atwiej. Bezpieczniej. Internet tak jak lubisz. > > ... and if there's one thing that bugs me more than tag lines, it's > SPAMmy tag lines. > _______________________________________________ > VNC-List mailing list > [email protected] > To remove yourself from the list visit: > http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list [email protected] To remove yourself from the list visit: http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
