* Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-05 17:00:19 -0500]: >This will be my last post about this topic. I am not gonna waste more >time on this trivial issue, even if it is important to many of you.
Well, I've read quite a bit further down this thread before responding to this message, and I must say that regardless of any other netiquette breaches you may be guilty of, you did manage to not post again after saying you wouldn't; that's a skill a lot of us would do well to learn, I think. :p However... >I do not know exactly how many people reply before quoted message but >over 90% of my daily emails are in this style and I can see this kind of >emails all over the Internet. Maybe they are all bad-mannered people, >maybe they are all corrupted by M$, I feel quite comfortable with this >style and will continue to use it. Well, obviously neither I nor anyone else can stop you, but I wish you wouldn't. It's just simply not the best way to do things. In addition to the various politeness-based reasons already cited by others, the one thing that really brings it home for me (as someone who values solutions that have empirical merit) is that top-quoting simply doesn't scale. What I mean is, if you are responding to a message that contains two separate points, to which you want to reply separately, putting your reply in one block (either at the top _or_ bottom) has certain objective, quantifiable disadvantages. Therefore, assuming you accept these two statements: 1) A reply to two separate parts of the same message is clearer when the two reply blocks appear immediately below the parts of the message to which they pertain. 2) Consistency of style is important for effective communication. (Hint: the very existence of written language is a demonstration of this point) ...then it follows that top-replying is not the best way. As an additional point, I submit the following excerpt from a post from [EMAIL PROTECTED], to the newsgroup microsoft.public.win2000: #When including text from a previous message in the thread, trim it #down to include only text pertinent to your response. Your response #should appear below the quoted information. In follow-ups, whether #News or Mail, CUT headers & signatures, PRUNE quotations, and preserve #order. That is to say, quote above each part of your reply as much #of the earlier stuff as is needed to put the new material in context, #but no more; most readers will be able to refer to the earlier article #itself, if need be. Never write on the same line as a quotation, except #in lists and notes; generally leave a wholly blank line between. Do not #quote the header or the signature, unless it is relevant to do so. Whether one's interpretation of the above is "Microsoft said it, it must be true" or "Microsoft is saying it, which means it must be a standard that's been around so long that even they couldn't embrace and extend it", the message is the same. :) Now, I must say I find it quite humorous that their own official posting guidelines are violated by their own newsreader, but that's a whole other story. :) (Or is it...should you really think that all those Outlook users out there are doing the right thing when their client's default behaviour isn't even consistent with its author's employees' stated wishes?) >In this discussion, many replies are polite and informative but others >are cynical and rude, even they are written in 'good style'. I can sit >down and argue with you about compared to web, ftp, mp3, rm, how much >bandwidth is used for emails but I decide to quit this discussion just >because many of you are too righteous to hear about it. > >Have a very good day. >Bo Well, I'm still writing this followup in hopes that: 1) ...you are still reading the thread, if not replying, and your mind might still be changed, or 2) ...someone else who is on the fence will make the right decision. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Buttery) This .sig is dedicated to David T-G, the only person who noticed enough to wonder whether I was typing these in manually the last time I broke my sig rotation script.
msg30804/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
