hello Charlie,
I appreciate this is doing nothing to help Roger with his query, by the
way ...
I agree and understand, however I personally still feel that the
composition technique, as long as it is legible, isn't a significant issue.
Just for the sake of interest, I choose to top-post and include all or
part of the previous email, for these reasons :
1) I feel it is more appropriate to present the reader straight away
with the 'new' content which I am offering in my reply.
2) If the reader feels any interest in putting my reply into context,
they can scroll down and see what I am replying to.
I do however not use top-posting if I am replying to various different
parts of an email, in which case I would use the 'quoting and replying
beneath' technique.
Dare I say it, in those scenarios, I also consider using html and a
slightly different text colour to contrast more clearly with the quoted
original.
It's fair to say I'm not a purist ! ;-)
I am however very interested in making my mail lists as 'neat' as
possible, and I process all plain text mails via Demime pretty much only
to use its 'advertising signature removal' to strip out any pre-existing
list footers. (which are always the same)
I allow html mails and do not Demime them at all, so as not to remove
the author's intended formating.
It's fair to say I'm not a purist ! ;-)
Just my perspective,
Lee
Charlie Summers wrote:
At 7:40 PM -0500 11/23/05, lee typed:
However do you really feel that top-posting is a technique which is bad
enough to warrant being bounced?
Absolutely. Top-posting never did make a lick of sense. It encourages
quoting entire messages (including signatures, footers, etc., etc.) and
_discourages_ quoting for context only.
Or indeed 'too much' quoting?
Lord yes. Over-quoting is the bane of modern maling lists; lok at your
message,. We all just read Roger's mail, yet you (or more accurately, your
email client) somehow thought it a good idea to repeat it in its entirety to
the entire list.
Again, makes no sense, and wastes bandwidth. In this reply, I _only_ quote
what is relevant to my responses, and no more. The "Q/A" format is easier to
comprehend, and indeed was THE standard until Microsloth decided with the
release of Outlook Express many moons ago to encourage sloppiness. (I have
often wondered if this was just another example of an intentional change to
convention to show everyone who was boss...)
If one or more readers don't personally like an email to be structured
in such a way, and actively object to it, I would feel they are petty
You'd really hate my lists as a poster, since the _maintainer_ objects to
such nonsense and enforces good netiquette. Of course, the vast majority of
subscribers who are readers and _not_ posters appreciate it, since the s/n
ratio and comprehendibility is much higher than seeing forwards of signatures
of forwards of footers of...
-
A perfect internet companion: LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
<http://uk.music.yahoo.com/lc/?rt=0&rp1=0&rp2=1453474498>
Example recent playlist HERE <http://www.incelsite.com/playlist.gif>
