Re: OT: Top Posting
On 5/15/24 10:50, Nicolas George wrote: Cindy Sue Causey (12024-05-15): PS Afterthought is that email signatures are another of that widely accepted netiquette set of standards. You can add the “Re: ” to that list. It is the sequence of four octets 0x52, 0x65, 0x3a, 0x20, and nothing else. The MUAs who write “RE: ” are wrong. The MUAs who write “Re : ” are wrong. The MUAs who write “AW: ” are wrong. The MUAs who put it in base64 are wrong. It is not a string that is designed to be internationalized, we cannot expect every MUA to know every stupid local or vanity variant of “Re: ”. + 5, Excellent point Nicolas The same can be said for sig separators. One fellow here has it as part of his sig but his definition in his sig is incomplete. Its actually an lf,dash,dash,space.lf ignoring the comma's I used here..Some email agents won't use it as a sig separator w/o the full lf's as wrapper. cr's are not valid subs for the lf's.. Regards, Take care & stay well Nicolas. Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. - Louis D. Brandeis
Re: OT: Top Posting
On 5/15/24 6:46 AM, Cindy Sue Causey wrote: . . . No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent that can. There are dozens of them. . . . Actually, it isn't necessarily the user's fault. Thanks to the "business standard," (and think about the initials) of top-posting over the complete, unpared quote of the entire thread, there are an awful lot of email readers (and especially webmail interfaces) that make it difficult to follow any other convention, and a few that make it damn-near impossible. Just as there are an awful lot that make it difficult or impossible to send a plain-text email. Incidentally, regarding the Hollerith card origins of the 80-column standard, the very first Hollerith cards, from the 1890 U.S. Census, had 24 columns and 12 rows of round holes, and were punched with a pantograph punch. In 1928, IBM introduced rectangular holes, in an 80-column, 10-row format, later expanded to 12 rows. -- JHHL
Re: OT: Top Posting
Since my request started this offtopic subthread I hope I can put it to rest. Yes I requested to not toppost. I asked politely, and I added pertinent response on topic. I do not claim to be right or wrong about this. I prefer interleaved style for reason. Everyone on this list heard all arguments pro and con in previous discussions, and there is no need to repeat them. It is a matter of personal choice though I have to admit I feel a bit emboldened by the posting guidelines. And in my experience a polite question goes a long way with most civilized people. You can ignore my request, well you even ask me to toppost. I will ignore it. There is no need for a lecture, you have no claim to right or wrong either. Claiming a de facto industry standard (I avoided the literally sidebar here) on majority is a questionable argument. Large numbers do not make right. There are many examples where the majority is wrong. Well I go along with majority practice knowing they are wrong, just to make life easier. I try not to yell at people though for choosing differently. And it is questionable to get you anywhere anytime fast. And I do not like that Gene was called an "epitome of humanity" in a cynical way and I earned a hypocrite long after I copped out of that discussion. Please let this rest. -H -- Henning Follmann | hfollm...@itcfollmann.com
Re: OT: Top Posting
Cindy Sue Causey (12024-05-15): > PS Afterthought is that email signatures are another of that widely > accepted netiquette set of standards. You can add the “Re: ” to that list. It is the sequence of four octets 0x52, 0x65, 0x3a, 0x20, and nothing else. The MUAs who write “RE: ” are wrong. The MUAs who write “Re : ” are wrong. The MUAs who write “AW: ” are wrong. The MUAs who put it in base64 are wrong. It is not a string that is designed to be internationalized, we cannot expect every MUA to know every stupid local or vanity variant of “Re: ”. Regards, -- Nicolas George
Re: OT: Top Posting
On 5/15/24 10:06, Nicolas George wrote: Cindy Sue Causey (12024-05-15): Best as I was able to discern from the Net [0], 72 characters is the magic number for line length because 4 extra characters are added to both ends when e.g. git processes submissions. Makes good common sense to me. Git is an order of magnitude younger than the limit at 72 characters. PS I thought it was 80. Guess it was about those extra 8 characters. It is 80 but you anticipate that people will be adding “> ” in front of your lines. "Pretty well agreed upon..." That's implying that unspoken list standards are really not users "picking on each other." Listserv standards is a concept that has evolved over decades for rational reasons as Developer and User communications evolved. Indeed. It's easy to mess up badly while moving emails around As a general rule, GUIs suck at anything but trivial tasks. Evolution appears to do some form of maybe symlinking instead of downloading so everything is available almost immediately seconds after the first time Evolution is ever fired up. The IMAP protocol is designed to let us manipulate mails directly on the server without downloading the bulk of them. A lot of GUI MUA are still designed around the old paradigm where mails are downloaded, and turned it into some kind of cache: it rarely works well. Manipulate mails directly on the server. Have a backup. If your server is often down and accessing the mails is urgent, have a local *copy* of it. reach back a limited time span into history before I a-sume Gmail cut off access to touching older emails. If you want mail that works well, start by avoiding services meant for the lowest common denominator of the general public. Regards, I'll add that googles gmail, written by former outlook developers is the biggest pita to ever hit the net. They break every rfc that can. Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. - Louis D. Brandeis
Re: OT: Top Posting
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 09:46:08AM -0400, Cindy Sue Causey wrote: > Best as I was able to discern from the Net [0], 72 characters is the > magic number for line length because 4 extra characters are added to > both ends when e.g. git processes submissions. Makes good common sense > to me. > > PS I thought it was 80. Guess it was about those extra 8 characters. For many decades, there was an industry standard that lines of text should be up to 80 characters wide. Punch cards were 80 characters wide, for example. I don't know whether punch cards were the *first* place it appeared, but they're the first I'm aware of. A lot of the printers from the last century allowed 80 characters per line on standard US 8.5x11 inch paper. I'm not sure if teletypes used 80-column paper, or 133-column paper (green bar), or a mixture. Later, we got terminals. A typical ASCII terminal (a physical one, like a DEC VT-100) is 80x24 characters, or sometimes 80x25. The 80-character line standard continued. When hardware evolved and most of us started using X11 or similar GUI interfaces, terminal emulators became the norm. xterm and other software terminal emulators use an 80x24 window as the default, for compatibility with physical terminals. When writing code in most programming languages, there are style guides that still suggest sticking to 80-character lines whenever possible. It avoids line wrapping when being read in an 80-character terminal, and besides that, really long lines of code are harder to read than shorter lines. When it comes to email or Usenet, though, the 72-character suggestion is meant to allow a bit of room for quoting markup. If I write a 79-character line of text, and then you reply to it with "> " in front, the resulting 81-character line of text either gets wrapped or truncated. Limiting yourself to 72-character lines allows a few levels of quoting before the text becomes unreadable. This is why the 72-character limit is just a suggestion, not a hard requirement. If you write lines that are 74 characters wide, probably nobody's going to care. The goal is simply to make it easy to carry on a conversation.
Re: OT: Top Posting
-Original Message- From: Greg Wooledge To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: OT: Top Posting Date: 05/14/24 13:41:17 On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote: > how many times has this top post crap been dug up > don't y'all have any thing better to do It's never going to stop. We have a clash of two cultures here. The first culture are Unix users who grew up with Internet email and Usenet news. For people in this culture, there is a well-defined set of "netiquette" rules -- plain text messages, inline quoting with "> " citation characters, lines limited to ~72 characters, etc. Too funny for words! Make that twice now that I've seen line length mentioned here on Debian in over a decade++. I also referenced the inline quoting method since my new chosen email software appears to be failing with its default on that feature. Will try AGAIN to fix that as soon as I hit "Send" here BECAUSE tech reply emails are difficult to follow without those stacked ">" over ">>" pointers attached showing who said what when. And, yeah, netiquette, that's the word echoed across the Internet. I totally forgot that in my own response. It's not users picking on each other. It's a respectful "virtual handshake approved" set of standards with the straightforward purpose of putting everyone on as close to the same page as is humanly possible. PS Afterthought is that email signatures are another of that widely accepted netiquette set of standards. I consciously altered mine many years ago after reading about that, most likely also here on Debian- User. Might have been over on W3C, too, now that I think about it. That's where I first heard of Linux circa 1999. W3C's Linux reference was about installing HTML validators locally, and the rest is terminal command line history. Thank you, Developers! What you all do and that works so near flawlessly in nanoseconds still.. blows my mind to this.. second. Watching daily upgrades methodically unfold as each package successfully coordinates its place in line with the others is pure magic. :) Cindy :) -- Talking Rock, Pickens County, North Georgia * runs with birdseed! *
Re: OT: Top Posting
Cindy Sue Causey (12024-05-15): > Best as I was able to discern from the Net [0], 72 characters is the > magic number for line length because 4 extra characters are added to > both ends when e.g. git processes submissions. Makes good common sense > to me. Git is an order of magnitude younger than the limit at 72 characters. > PS I thought it was 80. Guess it was about those extra 8 characters. It is 80 but you anticipate that people will be adding “> ” in front of your lines. > "Pretty well agreed upon..." That's implying that unspoken list > standards are really not users "picking on each other." Listserv > standards is a concept that has evolved over decades for rational > reasons as Developer and User communications evolved. Indeed. > It's easy to mess up badly while moving emails around As a general rule, GUIs suck at anything but trivial tasks. > Evolution appears to do some form of maybe symlinking instead of > downloading so everything is available almost immediately seconds after > the first time Evolution is ever fired up. The IMAP protocol is designed to let us manipulate mails directly on the server without downloading the bulk of them. A lot of GUI MUA are still designed around the old paradigm where mails are downloaded, and turned it into some kind of cache: it rarely works well. Manipulate mails directly on the server. Have a backup. If your server is often down and accessing the mails is urgent, have a local *copy* of it. > reach back a limited time span into history before I a-sume Gmail cut > off access to touching older emails. If you want mail that works well, start by avoiding services meant for the lowest common denominator of the general public. Regards, -- Nicolas George
Re: OT: Top Posting
-Original Message- From: gene heskett To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: OT: Top Posting Date: 05/14/24 10:54:50 On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote: Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's called a setting. No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent that can. There are dozens of them. DISCLAIMER: I just realized above portion might not quote properly. My apologies in advance if it does not. That's one glitch I haven't located a fix for, yet. The rest of the email: I think Evolution has finally fixed my own latest issues with tech reply emails just since Gmail forced all users onto its more dynamic release. My biggest issue is, hopefully "was," line length. This email is only my second reply sent in maybe 2 months so am about to find out how things are progressing. Accidentally just this second was reminded there's a setting for avoiding top posting by lunging to bottom of reply emails. That setting is found by going through the now classic 3-line settings "hamburger" then: Edit > Preferences > Composer Preferences > General (tab) There's a simple toggle on/off checkbox that says, "Start typing at the bottom." The setting for word wrapping is just a few lines above that. Regarding line length (word wrapping), that's an even less spoken "standard" that has merit at its base. I think I've seen it mentioned maybe one time in more than a decade++ on Debian. That "standard" is about usability.. readability.. aka conscious consideration for fellow list members. Best as I was able to discern from the Net [0], 72 characters is the magic number for line length because 4 extra characters are added to both ends when e.g. git processes submissions. Makes good common sense to me. PS I thought it was 80. Guess it was about those extra 8 characters. Or.. Maybe whoever I saw write that over ten years ago almost understood that "handshake standard" but not quite. That's one scary part of trusting strangers on the WWW. :) Again back to the concept of tech listserv standards, the source I'm referencing after randomly finding it via search this morning says, "The 50/72 Rule is a set of standards that are pretty well agreed upon in the industry to standardize the format of commit messages." "Pretty well agreed upon..." That's implying that unspoken list standards are really not users "picking on each other." Listserv standards is a concept that has evolved over decades for rational reasons as Developer and User communications evolved. Am not embarrassed to say Evolution has kicked my backside k/t its learning curve versus a user's level of cognitive ability. This experience ended up touching on "frightening" a couple times, e.g. I sent 2,000 online emails to (online) trash when that was not intended. It's easy to mess up badly while moving emails around between desktop folders because that activity directly affects the linked online email provider if a user approves those access permissions. For what it's worth as a huge selling point for me, I have a massive online email account. There are hundreds of thousands of emails from the last 20 years. Evolution said whatever, bring it on. Evolution appears to do some form of maybe symlinking instead of downloading so everything is available almost immediately seconds after the first time Evolution is ever fired up. Other email software I've used only seems to work by downloading. That difference is huge for anyone using a data download limiting Internet provider. NOTE: Evolution appears to possibly offer related tweaking if one prefers working offline. In the other email software cases I attempted, the software could only reach back a limited time span into history before I a-sume Gmail cut off access to touching older emails. If there's a work-around for that, I never found it. I simply (and immediately) purged the email software, instead. With Evolution, I'm instantly looking at emails I haven't seen in ~20 years. I was having a horrible time accessing those same emails in Gmail itself online. Talk about mind blowing nostalgia overload... Cindy :) [0] https://dev.to/noelworden/improving-your-commit-message-with-the-50-72-rule-3g79 -- Talking Rock, Pickens County, North Georgia * runs with birdseed! *
Markup in mail messages (was: Re: OT: Top Posting)
On 15/05/2024 02:32, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:16:20PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it. [...] The only sensible interpretation I can come up with for why these asterisks were added is that they're being placed around text that's supposed to be emphasized/italicized. *Bold*, /italics/, and _underlined_ markup is supported by various mailers, e.g. Thunderbird and Gnus. Some render superscripts^1 and subscripts_2 as well. Backticks (`echo $PATH`) are more specific to markdown. However sometimes I use them not expecting that the message will be rendered as markdown. Just to avoid ambiguity where a piece of code starts and ends.
Re: OT: Top Posting
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 6:05 PM Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 2:40 PM Richard wrote: > >> You really must think of yourself as being the epitome of human creation. >> I don't see any use in continuing this nonsense. If you don't have anything >> relevant to say, this case is closed for me. >> > > Who are you talking about? There are two people in the reply below. > Gene IS the epitome of human creation. > >> Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 16:55 Uhr schrieb gene heskett < >> ghesk...@shentel.net>: >> >>> On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote: >>> > Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean >>> it's >>> > not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's >>> > called a setting. >>> > >>> No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor >>> to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your >>> choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent >>> that can. There are dozens of them. >>> >>> > Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett >>> > mailto:loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>>: >>> > >>> > Hi Richard, >>> > >>> > Richard mailto:rrosn...@gmail.com>> writes: >>> > >>> > > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being >>> replied >>> > > to) is literally industry standard behavior. >>> > >>> > Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to? >>> > >>> > Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this >>> newsgroup? >>> > >>> > [snip (51 lines)] >>> > >>> > Cheers, >>> > >>> > Loris >>> >>> Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. >>> >>
Re: OT: Top Posting
On Tue, 14 May 2024, Andy Smith wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote: >> don't y'all have any thing better to do > > You must be new here. sorta i've only been using versions of linux since the early 90's :) downloaded it from an archie server on to 2 floppies > > Get used to reading with a "mark thread read" key in your MUA of > choice, is my best advice. i've got to admit to being weak reading the brilliant and riveting prose is addictive and entertainment is in short supply around here especially after the chickens go to bed > > Thanks, > Andy > > -- > https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting >
Re: OT: Top Posting
Hello, On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote: > don't y'all have any thing better to do You must be new here. Get used to reading with a "mark thread read" key in your MUA of choice, is my best advice. Thanks, Andy -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
Re: OT: Top Posting
Greg Wooledge wrote: > In this particular instance, we've got a person from the second > culture who seems to have no idea that other cultures exist, or that > a mailing list might not adhere to their own expectations. This > person is acting belligerantly, and will not listen to gentle > reminders. There's another point that this person doesn't seem to realize, which is that he's the one asking for help, and so he should be making efforts to adapt to the desires of those he wishes to help him, rather than trying to insist they adapt to his ways :( But there's a noticeably slower response to his posts now, so maybe he'll learn by experience.
Re: OT: Top Posting
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:16:20PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it. I can't be sure where they're coming from exactly, but every once in a while I see messages on debian-user, bug-bash or help-bash which have extra asterisk characters scattered throughout them (usually make the code samples break). The only sensible interpretation I can come up with for why these asterisks were added is that they're being placed around text that's supposed to be emphasized/italicized. When reading the message with the idea that "this might be markdown text" in mind, it's possible to guess, in most cases, which asterisks should be removed to render the code samples or terminal session pastes correct.
Re: OT: Top Posting
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 2:40 PM Richard wrote: > You really must think of yourself as being the epitome of human creation. > I don't see any use in continuing this nonsense. If you don't have anything > relevant to say, this case is closed for me. > Who are you talking about? There are two people in the reply below. Jeff > Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 16:55 Uhr schrieb gene heskett < > ghesk...@shentel.net>: > >> On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote: >> > Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's >> > not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's >> > called a setting. >> > >> No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor >> to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your >> choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent >> that can. There are dozens of them. >> >> > Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett >> > mailto:loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>>: >> > >> > Hi Richard, >> > >> > Richard mailto:rrosn...@gmail.com>> writes: >> > >> > > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being >> replied >> > > to) is literally industry standard behavior. >> > >> > Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to? >> > >> > Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this >> newsgroup? >> > >> > [snip (51 lines)] >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > Loris >> >> Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. >> >
Re: OT: Top Posting
well, speaking personally, I can respect both sides. I use a screen reader. Having to wade through loads of text, for a conversational flow, especially when not edited is far from productive for me personally. it is much better to have a top post, for me personally, because I have no issues reading below..if needful. I can only imagine what it is like for folks on small screens, having to translate from English etc. Do I understand the conversation idea? absolutely. Do I also realize that if the thread is not edited the conversation is less fluid and more a lake of mud? Absolutely as well. Karen On Tue, 14 May 2024, Nicolas George wrote: Greg Wooledge (12024-05-14): Usenet news. For people in this culture, there is a well-defined set of "netiquette" rules -- plain text messages, inline quoting with "> " citation characters, lines limited to ~72 characters, etc. I slightly disagree with this wording: you make it sound like we follow the rules just because they are there. Not so: we follow the rules because they make sense, because they make conversations more fluid: - Limiting to 72 characters was good because a lot of terminals were 80 columns, and it is still good because longer lines are hard to read but mail software still is not smart enough to rewrap text by the mile but not code. - Trimmed interleaved quoting presents to the reader the exact information they need in the order they need it to understand the reply and what it is about. In summary, the hackers culture expects the sender to spend a little effort into making the mail easy to read for the recipient(s) while the culture of the general population expects the sender to make as little effort as possible and the recipient(s) to bear the burden that the software in between cannot take, i.e. most of it. And the “(s)” tells us which culture is more efficient and why. The second culture are Windows users who grew up with Microsoft products in their school or workplace. In this culture, top-posting is the norm, and inline quoting is nigh impossible. Messages are often sent in either HTML or markdown format. Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it. The best course of action in this case is to drop it Indeed. But we can still discuss cultural issues relevant to mailing-lists around it. Regards, -- Nicolas George
Re: OT: Top Posting
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote: > how many times has this top post crap been dug up > don't y'all have any thing better to do > i know > how about some real debian issues > Hi, Have a quick look at the Debian-user FAQ posted each month and the Debian Code of Conduct. Both of those are real Debian issues - they're part of the way that this mailing list operates so that people can read and understand long threads. They also allow us to maintain smaller archives that nonetheless retain the important information. May I suggest that you look back at about 30 years worth of the history here? All the very best, as ever, Andy (amaca...@debian.org)
Re: OT: Top Posting
Greg Wooledge (12024-05-14): > Usenet news. For people in this culture, there is a well-defined set > of "netiquette" rules -- plain text messages, inline quoting with "> " > citation characters, lines limited to ~72 characters, etc. I slightly disagree with this wording: you make it sound like we follow the rules just because they are there. Not so: we follow the rules because they make sense, because they make conversations more fluid: - Limiting to 72 characters was good because a lot of terminals were 80 columns, and it is still good because longer lines are hard to read but mail software still is not smart enough to rewrap text by the mile but not code. - Trimmed interleaved quoting presents to the reader the exact information they need in the order they need it to understand the reply and what it is about. In summary, the hackers culture expects the sender to spend a little effort into making the mail easy to read for the recipient(s) while the culture of the general population expects the sender to make as little effort as possible and the recipient(s) to bear the burden that the software in between cannot take, i.e. most of it. And the “(s)” tells us which culture is more efficient and why. > The second culture are Windows users who grew up with Microsoft products > in their school or workplace. In this culture, top-posting is the norm, > and inline quoting is nigh impossible. Messages are often sent in either > HTML or markdown format. Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it. > The best course of action in this case is to drop it Indeed. But we can still discuss cultural issues relevant to mailing-lists around it. Regards, -- Nicolas George
Re: OT: Top Posting
On 5/14/24 10:41 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote: We have a clash of two cultures here. More than just *nix vs. M$. In business communications by email, the norm is to quote the *entire* thread, every time, without paring anything down, purely for the sake of CYA. As such, top-posting is the only reasonable alternative, given that recipients would otherwise have to scroll through hundreds, perhaps thousands of lines of quoted material to find a bottom-posted reply, or worse, *actually read* through all that quoted material to find an inline-posted reply. In list-server communications (and to a lesser extent, BBS posts), the norm is to pare down quoted material to the barest minimum needed to provide context (originally to save bandwidth and storage, both of which are *still* finite resources), and to bottom-post or inline-post one's replies, in order to give them a more natural flow. CYA doesn't factor in at all. -- JHHL
Re: OT: Top Posting
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote: > how many times has this top post crap been dug up > don't y'all have any thing better to do It's never going to stop. We have a clash of two cultures here. The first culture are Unix users who grew up with Internet email and Usenet news. For people in this culture, there is a well-defined set of "netiquette" rules -- plain text messages, inline quoting with "> " citation characters, lines limited to ~72 characters, etc. For users in this first group, email is often read and composed on a terminal, or a terminal emulator. Characters are displayed in a fixed-width font. ASCII art is possible, albeit frowned upon as juvenile. The second culture are Windows users who grew up with Microsoft products in their school or workplace. In this culture, top-posting is the norm, and inline quoting is nigh impossible. Messages are often sent in either HTML or markdown format. Whole paragraphs are presented as single lines. Explicit line breaks are only used between paragraphs. Users in this second group typically use Microsoft Outlook, or a web-based mail user agent in a graphical environment. Fonts are variable-width, and any ASCII art or tables will not align properly. Now, normally when these cultures clash, we're able to point to the Debian netiquette guidelines, and move on. In this particular instance, we've got a person from the second culture who seems to have no idea that other cultures exist, or that a mailing list might not adhere to their own expectations. This person is acting belligerantly, and will not listen to gentle reminders. The best course of action in this case is to drop it, but pride can make people do the wrong things sometimes.
Re: OT: Top Posting
how many times has this top post crap been dug up don't y'all have any thing better to do i know how about some real debian issues
Re: OT: Top Posting (was: Dovecot correct ownership for logs)
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 04:08:19PM +0200, Richard wrote: > Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's not > standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's called a > setting. Most people prefer inline quoting around here (I know I do). That's because for big mailing lists, with long threads, it works much, much better. That said, we usually are tolerant of top posts. What gets me is the hostility of your reaction. You aren't going to convince anyone. Even not with "industry standards" [1] As far as your main concern goes... I lost interest. Cheers [1] Q: How many Microsoft technicians does it take to change a light bulb? A: None, they just redefine Darkness (TM) as the new industry standard. https://www.linux.com/news/how-many-microsoft-technicians-does-it-take-change-light-bulb/ -- t signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: OT: Top Posting
You really must think of yourself as being the epitome of human creation. I don't see any use in continuing this nonsense. If you don't have anything relevant to say, this case is closed for me. Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 16:55 Uhr schrieb gene heskett : > On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote: > > Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's > > not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's > > called a setting. > > > No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor > to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your > choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent > that can. There are dozens of them. > > > Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett > > mailto:loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>>: > > > > Hi Richard, > > > > Richard mailto:rrosn...@gmail.com>> writes: > > > > > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being > replied > > > to) is literally industry standard behavior. > > > > Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to? > > > > Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this > newsgroup? > > > > [snip (51 lines)] > > > > Cheers, > > > > Loris > > > > -- > > This signature is currently under constuction. > > > > Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. > -- > "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: > soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." > -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) > If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. > - Louis D. Brandeis > >
Re: OT: Top Posting
On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote: Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's called a setting. No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent that can. There are dozens of them. Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett mailto:loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>>: Hi Richard, Richard mailto:rrosn...@gmail.com>> writes: > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied > to) is literally industry standard behavior. Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to? Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this newsgroup? [snip (51 lines)] Cheers, Loris -- This signature is currently under constuction. Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET. -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. - Louis D. Brandeis
Re: OT: Top Posting (was: Dovecot correct ownership for logs)
Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's called a setting. Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett < loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>: > Hi Richard, > > Richard writes: > > > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied > > to) is literally industry standard behavior. > > Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to? > > Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this newsgroup? > > [snip (51 lines)] > > Cheers, > > Loris > > -- > This signature is currently under constuction. > >
Re: (OT) Top Posting (was Re: Gimp Babl too old)
Kenneth Parker writes: > I have a special issue: Using Gmail on a Phone or Tablet (I have > both). Both of those devices lack a proper keyboard. That makes them unsuitable for composing anything but very short messages, and wholly unsuitable for editing text. > Seriously, how do others of you deal with navigating this Debian List > on Android, while being a "Good Netizen"? I deal with it by never composing or editing messages without a proper keyboard. Handheld, full-touchscreen devices are fine as reading devices, and maybe for very limited gross-control input, but it's a mistake to try to use them as text editing devices until you connect a real keyboard. -- \ “I know you believe you understood what you think I said, but I | `\ am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I | _o__) meant.” —Robert J. McCloskey | Ben Finney
Re: (OT) Top Posting (was Re: Gimp Babl too old)
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 6:17 AM, Kenneth Parker wrote: > Seriously, how do others of you deal with navigating this Debian List on > Android, while being a "Good Netizen"? Personally I don't. A phone is a horrible tool for composing texts and is nowhere near a replacement for a computer. Using an inferior tool is no excuse to inconvenience others. My pet peeve here is when people try to use the Stack Exchange app or whatever, and excuse the lousy formatting on "I'm on the phone", but thanks for pointing out another one: gmail top posting! It's bad enough in an an actual browser on a real computer... I loathe the "appification" of everything these days, dumbing down everything to the lowest lousiest common denominator for people who can only point and click with their thumbs. (I was about to write but I will never stop ranting about this!)
Re: [OT] top-posting (was: unlisted mirrors & non-gui installation)
Hi. On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:31:27 -0300 Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote: > On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 23:16:03 +0300 > Reco wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > Please do not top post. And please do not send html e-mails to the list. > > > > On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:40:08 -0500 > > Adrian O'Dell wrote: > > > > > That is not what appears in Debian 8, netinst. Here is the one that > > > appears: > > > You preach by example ? ;-3) Only if the situation calls for it. This one did :) And the best place for a friendly advice about top-posting is at the top. Reco
Re: [OT] top posting
On 17/01/2008, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > According to TFA, the events in question happened in Essex, Suffolk, > > and Middlesex Counties of colonial Massachusetts, which are in the > > United States, not Israel. You have me misplaced. > > Although it's been snipped out by now, chain-of-thread shows that he > was replying to me, and trying to make Yet Another Snide Comment > about the US. Ah, I see now. I was confused because he had quoted me quoting you. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Re: [OT] top posting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/17/08 12:46, Dotan Cohen wrote: > On 17/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if >> the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of >> wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. > The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like that... Given that you're in the country that invented the witch-hunt, that's not much surprise. >>> Care to elaborate? >> Some early American history here... >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials > > According to TFA, the events in question happened in Essex, Suffolk, > and Middlesex Counties of colonial Massachusetts, which are in the > United States, not Israel. You have me misplaced. Although it's been snipped out by now, chain-of-thread shows that he was replying to me, and trying to make Yet Another Snide Comment about the US. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables!" unknown -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHj6c5S9HxQb37XmcRAkfNAJkBlNMT4ciYbxz6QcHfBPcf1ajsjACg7Hz0 W7Pre2NMHGlcrs/8UJkFKoQ= =HLi2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 05:59 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:58:09AM -0600, Kent West wrote: > >> Ron Johnson wrote: > >>> Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy > >>> trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. > >> Two. No, seven! > >> > >> Arg. You made me lose count! > > > > oh come on. Everyone knows this: 42! > > > > Damn! I thought I was alone on the head of this pin! > 42 is, in fact, the answer to the question about Life, Universe and Everything else... -- Marcelo Chiapparini [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On 17/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if > > > > > the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of > > > > > wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. > > > > > > > > The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like that... > > > > > > Given that you're in the country that invented the witch-hunt, that's > > > not much surprise. > > > > Care to elaborate? > > Some early American history here... > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials According to TFA, the events in question happened in Essex, Suffolk, and Middlesex Counties of colonial Massachusetts, which are in the United States, not Israel. You have me misplaced. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Re: [OT] top posting
Andrew Sackville-West wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:58:09AM -0600, Kent West wrote: Ron Johnson wrote: Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Two. No, seven! Arg. You made me lose count! oh come on. Everyone knows this: 42! Damn! I thought I was alone on the head of this pin! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:43:23PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 05:12:07PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:53:34PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > > Well, now you're just contradicting. > > > > > > > > > > I'd tell you why that's not true but there's a bunch of mean > > > > > looking guys at my door. I figure it's either the Spanish > > > > > Inquisition or the Business Software Alliance. (Is there much > > > > > of a difference?) > > > > > > > > Albatross > > > > ... > > > > Albatross > > > > > > But the albatross was good luck. > > > > > > Until some damn fool sailor shot it. > > > > not at the hollywood bowl, it was froozen > > Guess you not only don't read poetry, but haven't seen "Serenity"... poetry only at school (long time ago) and I have seen serenity, but my quote was from the bowl > > Hal > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- BOFH excuse #441: Hash table has woodworm signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), > > > > > so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be > > > > > made of wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. > > > > > > > > The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like > > > > that... > > > > > > Given that you're in the country that invented the witch-hunt, > > > that's not much surprise. > > > > Care to elaborate? > > Some early American history here... > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials Still, it's NOT the country that originated the witch hunt. Not by far. They were going on for centuries before that country existed (and you can say that about almost any modern country). Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 05:12:07PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:53:34PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > Well, now you're just contradicting. > > > > > > > > I'd tell you why that's not true but there's a bunch of mean > > > > looking guys at my door. I figure it's either the Spanish > > > > Inquisition or the Business Software Alliance. (Is there much > > > > of a difference?) > > > > > > Albatross > > > ... > > > Albatross > > > > But the albatross was good luck. > > > > Until some damn fool sailor shot it. > > not at the hollywood bowl, it was froozen Guess you not only don't read poetry, but haven't seen "Serenity"... Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:46:38 +1300 Chris Bannister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [snip] > Its also to recommended to set the line wrap variable in your editor to > about 72 or so. I don't know how to set that in Slypheed Claws. Configuration / Preferences / Compose / Wrapping > Chris. Celejar -- mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
Paul Johnson wrote: On Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like that... Given that you're in the country that invented the witch-hunt, that's not much surprise. Care to elaborate? Some early American history here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials Before that even: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Antiquity But I must admit that it has been turned into an artform in recently settled countries. e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthism ...and, of course, the current scenario. Regards, -- David Palmer Linux User - #352034 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Jan 16, 2008 8:08 AM, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if > > > > the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of > > > > wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. > > > > > > The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like that... > > > > Given that you're in the country that invented the witch-hunt, that's > > not much surprise. > > Care to elaborate? Some early American history here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials -- Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:07:08 -0600 Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 01/14/08 18:58, Alex Samad wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:25:14PM -0800, Raquel wrote: > >> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:52:04 +1100 > >> Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> my mail reader sort my mail in date order and links together all > >>> the threaded emails. I read them in date/time order, if I follow > >>> a thread from begging to end, then all i should have to do is read > >>> the top posts, but if they bottom posted, then as the thread grows > >>> I find I have to scroll further down, re reading the same > >>> information I have read in the previous email. > >> Then the people posting are not trimming their posts as they should. > > or taken to the extreme, why not remove all the original post! > > Extremism is the hallmark of the non-thinker. "Extremes are alone logical, but they are always absurd." -- Samuel Butler in Erewhon. One of the greatest aphorisms I know. www.theabsolute.net/minefield/butler.html > Ron Johnson, Jr. > Jefferson LA USA Celejar -- mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 05:12:07PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:53:34PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > > Well, now you're just contradicting. > > > > > > I'd tell you why that's not true but there's a bunch of mean > > > looking guys at my door. I figure it's either the Spanish > > > Inquisition or the Business Software Alliance. (Is there much of a > > > difference?) > > > > Albatross > > ... > > Albatross > > But the albatross was good luck. > > Until some damn fool sailor shot it. not at the hollywood bowl, it was froozen > > > Hal > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Unix weanies are as bad at this as anyone. -- Larry Wall in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:53:34PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > [snip] > > > > Well, now you're just contradicting. > > > > I'd tell you why that's not true but there's a bunch of mean > > looking guys at my door. I figure it's either the Spanish > > Inquisition or the Business Software Alliance. (Is there much of a > > difference?) > > Albatross > ... > Albatross But the albatross was good luck. Until some damn fool sailor shot it. Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 09:23:39PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 01/15/08 19:24, s. keeling wrote: > > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> On 01/15/08 17:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > >>> The problem, the oft-overlooked side comment made by one of the > >>> peasants. Small rocks float. So though she may weigh the same as a > >> Really? > > > > Pumice? > > I thought of that, but it only floats because it's a big hard sponge. > > >> Since when are witches made of wood? Or small rocks? > > > > I thought you'd seen the movie. "Bring out your dead." > > It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole movie. Weird how things like this turn up. http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=380 Search for witch. -- Chris. == -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:29:49PM +1100, Alex Samad wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 04:17:42PM -0900, Ken Irving wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:00:28PM +1100, Alex Samad wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:49:52PM -0900, Ken Irving wrote: > > > > In fact, it's a social convention, a matter of etiquette. The practice > > > > varies, and some lists work the other way, but on this and many lists > > > > the convention is to top post, trim heartily, try to get the > > > > attributions > > > > Arghh... that should've been "bottom post", or at least "to not top post"... > > > > > It the convention is to top post then we don't seem to be following the > > > convention. ( I thought it was to not top post ?) > > > > Yup, I screwed that up pretty well. ;-) > > > > I find in situations like this its best to laugh a little, i have been > spending > a bit of time laughing at myself recently > > > -- > > Ken Irving, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > It makes sense to snip eveything after your post which is not relevent, this includes the signature. Not done here for demonstration purposes. :-) -- Chris. == -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:07:41AM +0100, Dan H wrote: > > Again: There is NO NEED to "scroll" through redundant stuff! You need to EDIT > the irrelevant stuff away! What's so hard to understand about this? > > Do you notice that this posting, although it is deep in an ongoing thread, > covers barely half a screen page, yet it comes right to the point and > contains enough quoted context so that anybody jumping onto the thread at > this point sees what it's all about, while someone who has followed the > thread from the beginning doesn't fall asleep scrolling through pages of > ground that's been covered many times over? Its also to recommended to set the line wrap variable in your editor to about 72 or so. I don't know how to set that in Slypheed Claws. -- Chris. == -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:53:34PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: [snip] > > > > Well, now you're just contradicting. > > I'd tell you why that's not true but there's a bunch of mean looking > guys at my door. I figure it's either the Spanish Inquisition or the > Business Software Alliance. (Is there much of a difference?) Albatross ... Albatross > > Hal > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- When you speak to others for their own good it's advice; when they speak to you for your own good it's interference. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:56:28AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:55:15AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > > > > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole > > > > > > > > movie. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and apparently, one can recover from being turned into a > > > > > > > newt. ;) > > > > > > > > > > > > Only if 'es not dead yet. > > > > > > > > > > > > Or been eaten by a swallow, laden or unladen. > > > > > > > > > > European or African ? > > > > > > > > What's your problem? Do you want to have an argument? > > > > > > in the world of python there is a difference > > > > I'm sorry, but you just can't have an argument. > > Well, now you're just contradicting. I'd tell you why that's not true but there's a bunch of mean looking guys at my door. I figure it's either the Spanish Inquisition or the Business Software Alliance. (Is there much of a difference?) Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:56:28AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:55:15AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > > > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole > > > > > > > movie. > > > > > > > > > > > > and apparently, one can recover from being turned into a > > > > > > newt. ;) > > > > > > > > > > Only if 'es not dead yet. > > > > > > > > > > Or been eaten by a swallow, laden or unladen. > > > > > > > > European or African ? > > > > > > What's your problem? Do you want to have an argument? > > > > in the world of python there is a difference > > I'm sorry, but you just can't have an argument. Well, now you're just contradicting. A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:57:51AM +0100, Ulrich Schweitzer wrote: > On Tuesday 15 January 2008 05:34:28 Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > > I always hated that STOP AHEAD thing. I always figured if you are > > close enough to the words that it mattered which one you drove over > > first, you aren't looking far enough up the road. And if you are > > following too closely to read it all at once, then you are following > > too closely. There's probably a reason I'm not a traffic engineer. > > Just a side note (and even more off topic): In Germany (and as far as I > know the rest of Europe as well), text written on streets is top to bottom. > When I were in the US or South America it always seemed very strange to me > that the order of lines would be upside down. I'm not alone! A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
> Given that you're in the country that invented the witch-hunt, that's > not much surprise. I wasn't aware that he was from Babylonia! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Antiquity -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On 15 Jan, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 09:23:39PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: >> On 01/15/08 19:24, s. keeling wrote: >> > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> On 01/15/08 17:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: >> >>> The problem, the oft-overlooked side comment made by one of the >> >>> peasants. Small rocks float. So though she may weigh the same as >> >>> a Really? >> > >> > Pumice? >> >> I thought of that, but it only floats because it's a big hard sponge. >> > > no, not pumice. In the "burn the witch" scene of Monty Python and the > Holy Grail, there is the question "What, besides ducks, floats?" and > after much yelling they all agree that wood floats. But one of the > peasants says "small rocks". > I thought that it was ¨very small rocks¨. It´s been a while. -Chris | Christopher Judd, Ph. D. | | Research Scientist III | | NYS Dept. of Health [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Wadsworth Center - ESP | | P. O. Box 509518 486-7829 | | Albany, NY 12201-0509 | IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential or sensitive information which is, or may be, legally privileged or otherwise protected by law from further disclosure. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, please do not distribute, copy or use it or any attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.
Re: [OT] top posting
On 16/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if > > > the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of > > > wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. > > > > The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like that... > > Given that you're in the country that invented the witch-hunt, that's > not much surprise. Care to elaborate? Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Jan 16, 2008 12:42 AM, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 01/15/08 23:14, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if > > > the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of > > > wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. > > > > The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like that... > > Given that you're in the country that invented the witch-hunt, that's > not much surprise. It wasn't invented in one country. That kind of crap is as old as civilization, even older. It's just that some cases became famous. Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:55:15AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole > > > > > > movie. > > > > > > > > > > and apparently, one can recover from being turned into a > > > > > newt. ;) > > > > > > > > Only if 'es not dead yet. > > > > > > > > Or been eaten by a swallow, laden or unladen. > > > > > > European or African ? > > > > What's your problem? Do you want to have an argument? > > in the world of python there is a difference I'm sorry, but you just can't have an argument. Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Jan 16, 2008 12:42 AM, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 01/15/08 23:14, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > [snip] > > If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if > > the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of > > wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. > > The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like that... Given that you're in the country that invented the witch-hunt, that's not much surprise. -- Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On 16/01/2008, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if > > the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of > > wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. > > The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like that... The sad thing is that I work for them. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Re: [OT] top posting
On 16/01/2008, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "This text in English or Dutch." > > On that page, right under the "$Revision: 2.4 $", click on the word > "English". > Thanks. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:02:07 +0100 (CET) "s. keeling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, why don't your lines wrap at ca. 80 chars? Missed that lesson? Huh? I set Claws to wrap at 70. I thought it would do that automatically before sending the message... Fixed. --D. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tuesday 15 January 2008 05:34:28 Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > I always hated that STOP AHEAD thing. I always figured if you are > close enough to the words that it mattered which one you drove over > first, you aren't looking far enough up the road. And if you are > following too closely to read it all at once, then you are following > too closely. There's probably a reason I'm not a traffic engineer. Just a side note (and even more off topic): In Germany (and as far as I know the rest of Europe as well), text written on streets is top to bottom. When I were in the US or South America it always seemed very strange to me that the order of lines would be upside down. Ulrich -- Institut für Plasmaforschung, Universität Stuttgart Tel. 0711/685-62156 PGP key ID: 0xDF6FC4FA
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 17:37:16 +1100, Alex Samad wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > ... > > > > It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole movie. > > > > > > and apparently, one can recover from being turned into a newt. ;) > > > > Only if 'es not dead yet. > > > > Or been eaten by a swallow, laden or unladen. > European or African ? Huh? I... I don't know that. Agh +++ NO CARRIER +++ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:55:15AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > > ... > > > > > > > > It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole movie. > > > > > > > > and apparently, one can recover from being turned into a newt. ;) > > > > > > Only if 'es not dead yet. > > > > > > Or been eaten by a swallow, laden or unladen. > > > > European or African ? > > What's your problem? Do you want to have an argument? in the world of python there is a difference > > Either, as long as it's pining for the fjords. > > Hal > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "I can remember the time when it was said that the Bush administration goes it alone too often in the world, which I always thought was a bogus claim to begin with. And now all of a sudden people are saying, the Bush administration ought to be going alone with North Korea. But it didn't work in the past is my point. The strategy did not work." - George W. Bush 10/11/2006 Washington, DC at a Press conference, in response to the question of whether his North Korean policy has been a failure signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 23:14, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: [snip] > If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if > the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of > wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. The sad thing is that I know people who's minds work like that... - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables!" unknown -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHjcNeS9HxQb37XmcRAlxeAKCEFWHeaCiwE7PJ+helobo77Di74ACfYIwS xCFM7TzlwP6WnsvkqHg+lIM= =/xQ+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Alex Samad wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > ... > > > > > > It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole movie. > > > > > > and apparently, one can recover from being turned into a newt. ;) > > > > Only if 'es not dead yet. > > > > Or been eaten by a swallow, laden or unladen. > > European or African ? What's your problem? Do you want to have an argument? Either, as long as it's pining for the fjords. Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > ... > > > It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole movie. > > > > and apparently, one can recover from being turned into a newt. ;) > > Only if 'es not dead yet. > > Or been eaten by a swallow, laden or unladen. European or African ? > > Hal > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "I'm hopeful. I know there is a lot of ambition in Washington, obviously. But I hope the ambitious realize that they are more likely to succeed with success as opposed to failure." - George W. Bush 01/18/2001 Interview with the Associated Press signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
On Wednesday 16 January 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: ... > > It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole movie. > > and apparently, one can recover from being turned into a newt. ;) Only if 'es not dead yet. Or been eaten by a swallow, laden or unladen. Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 09:23:39PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > On 01/15/08 19:24, s. keeling wrote: > > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> On 01/15/08 17:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > >>> The problem, the oft-overlooked side comment made by one of the > >>> peasants. Small rocks float. So though she may weigh the same as a > >> Really? > > > > Pumice? > > I thought of that, but it only floats because it's a big hard sponge. > no, not pumice. In the "burn the witch" scene of Monty Python and the Holy Grail, there is the question "What, besides ducks, floats?" and after much yelling they all agree that wood floats. But one of the peasants says "small rocks". > >> Since when are witches made of wood? Or small rocks? If ducks float, they must be made of wood (or small rocks), so if the witch weighs the same as a duck, then she must be made of wood and therefore, she'll float, so she's a witch. > > > > I thought you'd seen the movie. "Bring out your dead." > > It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole movie. > and apparently, one can recover from being turned into a newt. ;) A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
"Dotan Cohen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On 15/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 14, 2008 1:03 PM, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > You should read this: > > > http://what-is-what.com/what_is/top_posting.html > > > > I prefer http://learn.to/quote for that; the URL you mention only > > suggests what is wrong, but leaves what is right wide open to > > interpretation. > > Thanks. Do you have an English or Hebrew translation handy? > > Dotan Cohen > The link to an English translation is right there on the site just below the revision number. Cybe R. Wizard -- Nice computers don't go down. Larry Niven, Steven Barnes "The Barsoom Project" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
Sudev Barar wrote: On 16/01/2008, David Brodbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: *not* trim any of the quote history. I assume this was so whichever tech support drone in India got my latest message would be able to see the whole history. [OT] Do not assume and this *this* tech drone from India does favour trimming and bottom posting as do lot many people who are regular in many lists. Yeah, 'Baloo', you got caught out again! Regards, -- David Palmer Linux User - #352034 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On 16/01/2008, David Brodbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > *not* trim any of the quote history. I assume this was so whichever > tech support drone in India got my latest message would be able to see > the whole history. [OT] Do not assume and this *this* tech drone from India does favour trimming and bottom posting as do lot many people who are regular in many lists. -- Regards, Sudev Barar Read http://blog.sudev.in for topics ranging from here to there. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 20:32, Dotan Cohen wrote: > On 15/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Jan 14, 2008 1:03 PM, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> You should read this: >>> http://what-is-what.com/what_is/top_posting.html >> I prefer http://learn.to/quote for that; the URL you mention only >> suggests what is wrong, but leaves what is right wide open to >> interpretation. > > Thanks. Do you have an English or Hebrew translation handy? "This text in English or Dutch." On that page, right under the "$Revision: 2.4 $", click on the word "English". - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables!" unknown -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHjXozS9HxQb37XmcRAtNKAJ4rfIjqeqyZhzcvirEm/wtGD408tACdH98h IEQTlcFl0X2BHoYt675nHNo= =Z/Ud -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 20:43, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Jan 15, 2008 5:36 PM, David Brodbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Jan 15, 2008, at 5:06 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >>> Stuff like that makes me think I'm better off now driving a truck. >>> Pays about the same as a decent, call-center and outsource-free >>> environment either way... >> Isn't NAFTA about to "in-source" Mexican trucks to take care of that? > > Not NAFTA, a Bush Administration executive order. The repeal of > Mexican trucks lasted all of eight weeks, Bush signed a war funding > bill that had a Mexican trucking ban tacked on as a rider. Now this thread is *really* OT. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables!" unknown -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHjXloS9HxQb37XmcRAuhQAJ0ZnCTzxdK8c+PL+EZcfjzFudooqwCgkwu0 aF6lysx1RTwfA1/xvIYaq0Y= =zNWs -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 19:24, s. keeling wrote: > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> On 01/15/08 17:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: >>> The problem, the oft-overlooked side comment made by one of the >>> peasants. Small rocks float. So though she may weigh the same as a >> Really? > > Pumice? I thought of that, but it only floats because it's a big hard sponge. >> Since when are witches made of wood? Or small rocks? > > I thought you'd seen the movie. "Bring out your dead." It's been quite a while, and we can't quote the whole movie. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables!" unknown -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHjXi7S9HxQb37XmcRAo6iAKCq77BHypUWGXcO3qLcwwmN5A6U5ACg2Jkm Urt0/DrOR2xRmseUr1HehRo= =pQ76 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 08:42:31PM -0500, Celejar wrote: > >Thus mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know >what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true. >People who have been puzzled by the beginnings of mathematics will, I >hope, find comfort in this definition, and will probably agree that it >is accurate. Ahh! George DoubleYah is a mathemeticn; mathmechanic; methemechatic; mathamphetamine :) Doug. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Jan 15, 2008 5:36 PM, David Brodbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 15, 2008, at 5:06 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Stuff like that makes me think I'm better off now driving a truck. > > Pays about the same as a decent, call-center and outsource-free > > environment either way... > > Isn't NAFTA about to "in-source" Mexican trucks to take care of that? Not NAFTA, a Bush Administration executive order. The repeal of Mexican trucks lasted all of eight weeks, Bush signed a war funding bill that had a Mexican trucking ban tacked on as a rider. -- Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On 15/01/2008, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 14, 2008 1:03 PM, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You should read this: > > http://what-is-what.com/what_is/top_posting.html > > I prefer http://learn.to/quote for that; the URL you mention only > suggests what is wrong, but leaves what is right wide open to > interpretation. Thanks. Do you have an English or Hebrew translation handy? Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 07:28:15 -0600 Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [snip] > Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval > philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head > of a pin. Pure mathematics consists entirely of assertions to the effect that, if such and such a proposition is true of anything, then such and such another proposition is true of that thing. It is essential not to discuss whether the first proposition is really true, and not to mention what the anything is, of which it is supposed to be true ... If our hypothesis is about anything, and not about some one or more particular things, then our deductions constitute mathematics. Thus mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true. People who have been puzzled by the beginnings of mathematics will, I hope, find comfort in this definition, and will probably agree that it is accurate. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bertrand_Russell > Ron Johnson, Jr. > Jefferson LA USA Celejar -- mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Jan 15, 2008, at 5:06 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: Stuff like that makes me think I'm better off now driving a truck. Pays about the same as a decent, call-center and outsource-free environment either way... Isn't NAFTA about to "in-source" Mexican trucks to take care of that? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On 01/15/08 17:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > > > The problem, the oft-overlooked side comment made by one of the > > peasants. Small rocks float. So though she may weigh the same as a > > Really? Pumice? > Since when are witches made of wood? Or small rocks? I thought you'd seen the movie. "Bring out your dead." -- Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. (*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292 - -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
David Brodbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Jan 14, 2008, at 5:40 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > > This is a bottom-posting list, like every other list that has such a > > rule. I've never heard of a list that specifically _prefers_ top > > posting. If there is such a list, I doubt that it would be of a very > > technical nature. > > While not technically a mailing list, I've dealt with several tech > support email addresses where I was instructed to top-post and to > *not* trim any of the quote history. I assume this was so whichever > tech support drone in India got my latest message would be able to see In business, just for the sake of communicating uniformly, I accept it. Whatever makes it easier for mortals to explain whatever is the problem (in their eyes) is well worth other minor irritations. Not on mailing lists (which I read) or Usenet News, please. -- Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. (*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292 - -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Jan 15, 2008 4:50 PM, s. keeling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Jan 14, 2008 1:03 PM, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > You should read this: > > > http://what-is-what.com/what_is/top_posting.html > > > > I prefer http://learn.to/quote for that; the URL you mention only > > Tried that lately? Goes to "The Webalias Network." It's the correct page. Most English literate people can read the first line for the English page; the author's hosting doesn't seem to detect the language automatically for whatever reason. -- Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
Dan H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > No, it's best to always trim the original to the extent that it still > contains the relevant context for your reply. Half a dozen lines is usually > enough. > > Of course I've got about 15 years of Usenet experience under my belt. That > teaches discipline! So, why don't your lines wrap at ca. 80 chars? Missed that lesson? -- Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. (*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292 - -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Jan 15, 2008 4:20 PM, David Brodbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 14, 2008, at 5:40 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > > This is a bottom-posting list, like every other list that has such a > > rule. I've never heard of a list that specifically _prefers_ top > > posting. If there is such a list, I doubt that it would be of a very > > technical nature. > > While not technically a mailing list, I've dealt with several tech > support email addresses where I was instructed to top-post and to > *not* trim any of the quote history. I assume this was so whichever > tech support drone in India got my latest message would be able to see > the whole history. More like Microsoftian issues with small minded users. I worked for a department that switched from conversational quoting to top posting, and we took a pretty nice efficiency hit from having to backtrack awkwardly since all of us on the team were active in about 50 or so threads at any given time. Stuff like that makes me think I'm better off now driving a truck. Pays about the same as a decent, call-center and outsource-free environment either way... -- Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Jan 14, 2008 1:03 PM, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You should read this: > > http://what-is-what.com/what_is/top_posting.html > > I prefer http://learn.to/quote for that; the URL you mention only Tried that lately? Goes to "The Webalias Network." -- Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. (*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292 - -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Jan 14, 2008 6:43 PM, s. keeling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I believe (maybe wrongly ) that this mailing list is a non > > > top-posting list, I try and conform. > > > > You're correct. List policy prefers "snip irrelevancies and bottom > > post." > > Where are you quoting from? If that's on l.d.o, perhaps it's time to > s/bottom\ post/conversational\ quote/ and link the result to a good You're right. Conversational is better. Poor choice of words on my part. -- Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. (*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292 - -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Jan 14, 2008, at 5:40 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: This is a bottom-posting list, like every other list that has such a rule. I've never heard of a list that specifically _prefers_ top posting. If there is such a list, I doubt that it would be of a very technical nature. While not technically a mailing list, I've dealt with several tech support email addresses where I was instructed to top-post and to *not* trim any of the quote history. I assume this was so whichever tech support drone in India got my latest message would be able to see the whole history. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 17:05, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 04:57:15PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: >> On 01/15/08 16:46, Alex Samad wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:28:15AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. >>> I see you are so wise in the ways of science? >>> and thus understand >>> >>> " >>> If she weighed the same as a duck... she's made of wood. >>> And therefore... >>> ...A witch! >>> " >> Sure I understand it. Anyone who doesn't, doesn't deserve to have a >> computer, much less be on this list. >> > > The problem, the oft-overlooked side comment made by one of the > peasants. Small rocks float. So though she may weigh the same as a Really? > duck, she could be made of rock, in which case "Burn Her!" is not an > appropriate solution. > > So to test the hypothesis that she's made of wood, one must attempt to > burn her and determine the results. If she burns, she's made of wood > and therefore... > ...A witch! > > -or- > > if she doesn't burn, she's made of small rocks and therefore... > ...A witch! > > qed. Since when are witches made of wood? Or small rocks? - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables!" unknown -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHjUKIS9HxQb37XmcRAoTUAKCSF00xO0QoHFxFpugyQLPAZHwCFwCbBEqS HQGwqmotWe6XYgtEzMPfXOU= =aWyx -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 04:57:15PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > On 01/15/08 16:46, Alex Samad wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:28:15AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > >> Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval > >> philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head > >> of a pin. > > > > I see you are so wise in the ways of science? > > and thus understand > > > > " > > If she weighed the same as a duck... she's made of wood. > > And therefore... > > ...A witch! > > " > > Sure I understand it. Anyone who doesn't, doesn't deserve to have a > computer, much less be on this list. > The problem, the oft-overlooked side comment made by one of the peasants. Small rocks float. So though she may weigh the same as a duck, she could be made of rock, in which case "Burn Her!" is not an appropriate solution. So to test the hypothesis that she's made of wood, one must attempt to burn her and determine the results. If she burns, she's made of wood and therefore... ...A witch! -or- if she doesn't burn, she's made of small rocks and therefore... ...A witch! qed. A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 16:46, Alex Samad wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:28:15AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > On 01/15/08 06:36, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > [snip] > I always start at the last page and write upwards so my diary becomes > illegible to all, including me, in order to attempt to have time move > backwards. At my age that become imperative. > From today's Science Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?8dpc The Boltzmann brain problem arises from a string of logical conclusions that all spring from another deep and old question, namely why time seems to go in only one direction. >> Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval >> philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head >> of a pin. > > I see you are so wise in the ways of science? > and thus understand > > " > If she weighed the same as a duck... she's made of wood. > And therefore... > ...A witch! > " Sure I understand it. Anyone who doesn't, doesn't deserve to have a computer, much less be on this list. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables!" unknown -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHjTpLS9HxQb37XmcRAit3AKCCuJMYCcJiYQ1sdD2UXIPgdbn9GwCg2ZFO IdyTKs4lkVcaxq2H2OonPhw= =V2Oi -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:28:15AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 01/15/08 06:36, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > > Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > [snip] > >> > >> I always start at the last page and write upwards so my diary becomes > >> illegible to all, including me, in order to attempt to have time move > >> backwards. At my age that become imperative. > >> > > > > From today's Science Times: > > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?8dpc > > > > > > The Boltzmann brain problem arises from a string of logical conclusions > > that all spring from another deep and old question, namely why time > > seems to go in only one direction. > > Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval > philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head > of a pin. I see you are so wise in the ways of science? and thus understand " If she weighed the same as a duck... she's made of wood. And therefore... ...A witch! " > > - -- > Ron Johnson, Jr. > Jefferson LA USA > > "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian > because I hate vegetables!" > unknown > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFHjLTvS9HxQb37XmcRAnMzAKDi4Q2GSF/q30N5O6tHh/FsPSHm7gCgok9D > rUqPGmeM/CFKDYsm70HLvTk= > =GO9S > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "Haven't we already given money to rich people? Why are we going to do it again?" - George W. Bush 11/26/2002 Washington, DC to economic advisers discussing a second round of tax cuts, as quoted by former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 09:24:52AM +, I.E.Broadbent wrote: > > blimey ... what's next folks, arguing Gulliver-style about which end > of the egg to open? oh please. Don't start that old flame-war again! Everyone knows it's the small end. ... > > Can we kill this OT subject now please? The best way to kill these OT threads is to ignore them. I'm off now to crack my eggs... A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:58:09AM -0600, Kent West wrote: > Ron Johnson wrote: >> Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy >> trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. > > Two. No, seven! > > Arg. You made me lose count! oh come on. Everyone knows this: 42! A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] top posting
Ron Johnson wrote: Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Two. No, seven! Arg. You made me lose count! -- Kent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/15/08 06:36, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: [snip] >> >> I always start at the last page and write upwards so my diary becomes >> illegible to all, including me, in order to attempt to have time move >> backwards. At my age that become imperative. >> > > From today's Science Times: > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?8dpc > > > The Boltzmann brain problem arises from a string of logical conclusions > that all spring from another deep and old question, namely why time > seems to go in only one direction. Exotic mathematics without a grounding in reality is medieval philosophy trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables!" unknown -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHjLTvS9HxQb37XmcRAnMzAKDi4Q2GSF/q30N5O6tHh/FsPSHm7gCgok9D rUqPGmeM/CFKDYsm70HLvTk= =GO9S -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Ron Johnson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/14/08 16:52, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 04:13:22PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/14/08 15:57, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 10:32:53AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/14/08 10:21, Ebanutiy Ebanatik Ebanatovich wrote: Sorry for offtopic but I'm wondering if the cause of avoiding of top posting is in something technical (e.g. to help forum software to create weekly digests correctly) or is it a question of etiquette? Rationality, because while some cultures read left->right, and others read right->left, all read top->bottom. None read bottom->top. [flame on] but we do read chronologically (in date order) and I for one hate having to go Thanks for making my point, since when does time "move" from bottom to top? so you are advocating top posting ? When you're writing a journal or diary, do you start at page 1 or page "last"? I always start at the last page and write upwards so my diary becomes illegible to all, including me, in order to attempt to have time move backwards. At my age that become imperative. From today's Science Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?8dpc The Boltzmann brain problem arises from a string of logical conclusions that all spring from another deep and old question, namely why time seems to go in only one direction. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
Ron Johnson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/14/08 16:52, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 04:13:22PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/14/08 15:57, Alex Samad wrote: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 10:32:53AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On 01/14/08 10:21, Ebanutiy Ebanatik Ebanatovich wrote: Sorry for offtopic but I'm wondering if the cause of avoiding of top posting is in something technical (e.g. to help forum software to create weekly digests correctly) or is it a question of etiquette? Rationality, because while some cultures read left->right, and others read right->left, all read top->bottom. None read bottom->top. [flame on] but we do read chronologically (in date order) and I for one hate having to go Thanks for making my point, since when does time "move" from bottom to top? so you are advocating top posting ? When you're writing a journal or diary, do you start at page 1 or page "last"? I always start at the last page and write upwards so my diary becomes illegible to all, including me, in order to attempt to have time move backwards. At my age that become imperative. Hugo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
> > All I am trying to point out is for a normal user ( ie somebody who > > is subscribed to the list), when a thread starts, you read them in > > date/time order as them come in, why seems illogical to have to > > scroll through stuff that you have just read. blimey ... what's next folks, arguing Gulliver-style about which end of the egg to open? Am I the open person who finds this 'noise' about top-posting to be more than just a tad purile? Email and txt-spk, both seen by many to be the scurge of any form of intellectual communication; .. and we're arguing about whether or not the words should be typed above or below a previously sent comment or opinion. >> Again: There is NO NEED to "scroll" through redundant stuff! You need >> to EDIT the irrelevant stuff away! What's so hard to understand about >> this? you mean like I have done with the rest of this way-too-OT conversation? Sorry guys-n-gals, if all you've got to get upset about is whether something is top-posted or not, then you obviously have a much more sheltered life than I. Can we kill this OT subject now please? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:49:52 -0900 Ken Irving <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In fact, it's a social convention, a matter of etiquette. The > practice varies, and some lists work the other way, but on this and > many lists the convention is to top post Huh? I don't think so, but even if what you say is true, why do you bottom-post? > trim heartily, try to get > the attributions right(1), and have a good day! > (1) the attribution from the OP is missing in this message, I think. That's correct. --D. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:58:46 +1100 Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:25:14PM -0800, Raquel wrote: > > Then the people posting are not trimming their posts as they > > should. > or taken to the extreme, why not remove all the original post! No, it's best to always trim the original to the extent that it still contains the relevant context for your reply. Half a dozen lines is usually enough. Of course I've got about 15 years of Usenet experience under my belt. That teaches discipline! --D. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] top posting
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:58:06 +1100 Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All I am trying to point out is for a normal user ( ie somebody who > is subscribed to the list), when a thread starts, you read them in > date/time order as them come in, why seems illogical to have to > scroll through stuff that you have just read. Again: There is NO NEED to "scroll" through redundant stuff! You need to EDIT the irrelevant stuff away! What's so hard to understand about this? Do you notice that this posting, although it is deep in an ongoing thread, covers barely half a screen page, yet it comes right to the point and contains enough quoted context so that anybody jumping onto the thread at this point sees what it's all about, while someone who has followed the thread from the beginning doesn't fall asleep scrolling through pages of ground that's been covered many times over? --D. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
