On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 10:13:08PM -0600, John Galt wrote: > On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: > >The problem with suggesting prefix responses are suitable in any context > >is that this leads almost immediately to bad practices: > > Yeah, like the free exchange of ideas: can't have that.
Irrelevant. *shrug* > > - Excessive quoting, sigs and all. > > How does appending rather than prepending change this? Intelligent people who append are likely to read through the previous text as they move down to compose their reply, and cut as they go. Intelligent people who prepend are, in my experience, more likely to forget. (Naturally, there are bad examples of both practices, but well-snipped prefix responses are rare on both mailing lists and Usenet.) > > http://www.ptialaska.net/~kmorgan/nquote.html > > > > Q7: Why shouldn't I put my comments above the quoted material? > > When you read your mail with rn, and have to send email over the "this > message is about to be sent to millions of computers" warning of pnews, > we'll talk. For about the last two years, I read debian-* list mail with trn, and followed up over that same warning. (I don't at the moment, but that's due to losing much of that environment to a disk crash.) Care to talk? Mailing lists and Usenet aren't much different, when you get right down to it, as long as you stay out of Usenet's more annoying cesspools. [snip flamebait] -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
