Wade Curry wrote:
boblq([EMAIL PROTECTED])@Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 10:59:19AM -0700:
On Friday 23 June 2006 10:50 am, Nicholas Wheeler wrote:
If your mail client doesn't make it easy for you to read top or
bottom posting mails, so easy that in fact, you've never cared
if someone top or bottom posted, and you have to whine and
complain about it -- definitely get a new mail client.
Maybe just write a filter that converts each message to the
desired format.
I accidentally discovered a mutt feature. the "S" command will
Skip the quoted text. So for bottom posts, the "I hate to scroll
down" argument becomes a non-issue.
Although, I do think that quoted text should all be part of the
current point being made (i.e.: it should be left in the e-mail
because it is supposed to be read again). In the end, the issue is
whether a poster is the kind of person who understands that
presenting ideas in writing is a discipline that entails choice of
vocabulary, format, an understanding of how the medium affects
communication and comprehension, and a certain degree of respect for the
sensibilities of the reader, whom you hoped to influence with those
ideas in the first place.
Top posting generally tells me that the poster didn't value the
audience, but was more concerned with the more selfish aim of "just
being heard". My children sometimes raise their voices sometimes
in order to be heard. Is it appropriate? Well, sometimes, but it
usually isn't. It's usually just that waiting and being polite is
so much less fun and satisfying than having the whole family listen
to him/her right now, simply because they opened the mouth.
Similarly, top posting usually strikes me as a rather cathartic
splattering of thoughts without the discipline to deliver your
message with thought and consideration for the reader.
The idea was put forth that it's the reader's fault/problem if they
don't have a mail client that makes it easier to deal with the
out-of-order presentation of text, that may or may not even be
relevant. I just don't see it. That amounts to placing the
responsibility for the clarity of the communication on the reader,
rather than on the composer of the e-mail. Having understood that
in a "backwards" fashion will lead to letter composition in a
backwards fashion, too.
Please show the courtesy of *composing* your e-mail messages,
especially those that go to a large group as this one is.
Composition doesn't happen automatically simply because the
"compose" button is clicked. Of course, if the e-mail is actually
composed as a whole, then I doubt it would be a big issue what line
or position in the letter happened to hold your own words.
Wade Curry
Hmmmm...
This is a great post because it made me think of a distinction that had
not occured to me before.
We might be able to generally distinguish "top" posters and "bottom"
posters between top posters being used to corresponding only on a
"one-to-one" or "one to very few" basis where the context of the
communication is personal and specifically followed by the recipient(s)
and therefore all previous exchanges are assumed known in full thus not
needing review nor "trimming". In contrast "bottom" posters are, by a
more diverse e-mail experience, used to and familiar with the "list"
model where none of the "one on one" assumptions of the "top" posters
regarding recipients is in effect thus demanding, for clarity, review
and "trimming"...
Hmmmm...
rbw
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
