On 29.11.12 08:42, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote: > I suppose what i'm saying is there are more important things in life to > worry about than something like this. I think provided people make some > sort of effort to conform to the way mailinglist posts should be > formatted, and particularly avoid things like html and other horrid MIME > stuff, then great. If they don't, well, i'm not going to hate them or > not respond to them or worse still just delete their mail. That's simply > childish. Or even just ask them in a polite and friendly manner to make > more of an effort when posting in the future.
If you stare into the eyes of those who grumble about "low write effort - high read effort" posts, you'll probably see someone who has learnt that written civility to potential technical rescuers is often the only reward those saviours receive. We cannot always contribute technical advice on every list we frequent, but we can honour the social contract: cooperation breeds cooperation, respect your helper, and a thankyou goes a long way. All three warrant good netiquette - the long established behavioural norm. On a list, there is _nothing_ more important than respecting those who take the trouble to read our posted mush, infer the missing bits, and do our problem solving for us. It is not a matter for appellants to deem to judge, and a rescuer who tolerates it is a rare saint who judges only for himself. Please consider that some with strong technical skills amuse themselves by reading many lists, perhaps many hundreds of emails in a session. (I usually face 700 - 1000 after a few days away.) Each post competes for attention, and a well formulated, well presented, interesting problem will usually be answered in preference to one where laziness shows in problem presentation - either form or content. After reading several hundred posts, and taking time to compose suggestions to a few, the temper of our potential helper may no longer extend to pandering to the sensitivity of the lazy appellant. Each reader has his own disrespect triggers. e.g. I press the FOAD button when confronted by the extreme laziness of uncapitalised sentences. And on one list, some post without using any quoting method which survives the html to plaintext translation that I have in place. There's no point trying to read that, and so no reply possibility. None of it is a problem. Those who observe netiquette are usually helped, and those who help choose what they will take the trouble to read. Erik -- A: Because it breaks the logical sequence of the discussion. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
