Chris, That etiquette applies to snipping posts down the thread aways. 3 or 4 previous posts down depending on context. Snipping the immediately preceding post you are replying to including the poster's name is discourteous and insulting to that poster and also destroys the context of the reply tending to make it less meaningful or relevant..
Edgar as moderator On Nov 25, 2012, at 5:35 PM, ChrisAustinLane wrote: > > I personally find the endlessly growing requoted and unsnipped emails to be a > breach of nettiquette. Top posting and quoting the entire thread is > traditionally frowned on in text only fora, and was not normal until about > ten years ago when MS Outlook became so common. > > On my phone the bandwidth is not neglegible and there is an additional cost > of scrolling time to skip all the quoted stuff. > > I'd buy the argument about context if people actually read carefully enough > for that to matter but there is so much talking past one another that the > context doesn't matter. > > Thanks, > Chris Austin-Lane > Sent from a cell phone > > On Nov 25, 2012, at 4:52, Edgar Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Joe, >> >> It destroys context when you snip off parts of the post you are replying to. >> >> And it's impolite as well. >> >> Additionally the bandwidth saved from a few lines of TEXT is totally >> insignificant. >> >> I tell you this a co-moderator. >> >> Edgar >> >> >> >> On Nov 24, 2012, at 8:03 PM, Joe wrote: >> >>> >>> Edgar, >>> >>> How fallibly un-perspicacious of you! >>> >>> I *always* do that, and always have done. >>> >>> Saves bandwidth, which is a commodity. >>> >>> --Joe >>> >>> > Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: >>> > >>> > Ouch! I thought we were being nice to each other? >>> > >>> > And btw what's this sudden snipping compulsion you have to snip off the >>> > bottom of the posts you are responding to? >>> [snip] >>> >> > >
