***
Apologies for top-posting in previous message- feeling a bit sleep
deprived today. Structure corrected in this posting, and I will try to be more
careful in future.
***
Is that really naughty? Fair number of folks do it here, and as long as a
person's keeping track of a thread, saves having to scroll down long strings
of posts. I'm just not on many other lists, so may not be up on etiquette...
Or netiquette, if you prefer. That's passe', right?
I'd have to say the 'condense' lobby is stronger in these parts, in spite of
the occasional contextual anomalies.
The_Beast
> On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 07:50:05AM -0500, Doug Evans wrote:
> Is that really naughty? Fair number of folks do it here, and as long as
So does trimming the material that's not relevant to your reply. We do after
all have a reliable mailing list, so it's not necessary to include
every single previous message in your response - the messages are
already available to every subscriber. (Excessive quoting also wastes
bandwidth, and email archive space.)
From: "Doug Evans"
> ***
OK, wasn't sure if I would get picked up on it or not - I know of many
lists
where a top-post will generate a large amount of complaining, so thought
I'd
try to head it off quickly to be on the safe side :-) Doesn't bother me
personally!
Steve Scothern
I'd said:
> Is that really naughty? Fair number of folks do it here,...
Roger: So does trimming the material that's not relevant to your reply. We
do...
But, previous, I: I'd have to say the 'condense' lobby is stronger in these
parts, in spite of the occasional contextual anomalies.
Sorry, Roger, but I'd have to call that a contextual anomaly. ;->=
Stephen: OK, wasn't sure if I would get picked up on it or not...
This is a VERY low-key list; I'd never be able to stand it otherwise,
with
my delicate constitution... ;->=
OH, my delicate, shell-like ears...
The_Beast
> >Doug Evans wrote:
> Yes.
Ok, Chris, I can see it causing problems, especially when mixed with bottom
posting.
However, my own client defaults to it, and I'm not sure it can be overridden.
Also, it tends to put nasty complex headers in the center of the post.
So, I'll stick with cut-and-paste, and hope I keep most folks happy.
;->=
The_Beast
excessive quoting can make reading the digest & archives a right pain and a
lot of work (scrolling)
certainly seeing email headers, long corporate email disclaimers and bloated
sigs quoted is annoying and puts you off reading what the person has to say
if you use a free threading service like gmail - its all pretty
unnecessary too and gives a much better user experience
you just need the shortest quote to give your reply context