Steve Mynott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Niklas Nordebo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > paraphrased: "You're not going to get everyone to abide by those rules so > > I'm going to jeopardy quote now just to irritate you" > > That wasn't actually the intention. I will top quote when I think it > makes the email easier to read which I think is generally the case > when you are writing more than you are quoting. > > A drawback of bottom quoting is that you have to scroll past the quote > in order to get the new material. I read a _lot_ of email and such > scrolling wastes valuable time and key strokes. It also raises > visability of your words. I am well aware that its against > USENET/mailing list tradition as codified in 1989 but I think its just > geek snobbery against Outlook and AOL users and the like really. > > Isn't the Perl way "There is More Than One Way to Do It?" > > Bottom quoting to me only makes sense to me now if you are responding > on a point to point basis (as I am doing now). So I use both quoting > styles.
No, it's much, much simpler than that. By quoting at the top, you are implying that you have not read and taken in the rest of the mail. -Dom -- | Semantico: creators of major online resources | | URL: http://www.semantico.com/ | | Tel: +44 (1273) 722222 | | Address: 33 Bond St., Brighton, Sussex, BN1 1RD, UK. |
