Hi Camaleón :)
Have you considered using NNTP?
No, I need to read the Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_News_Transfer_Protocol since I
never heard of those 4 letters before :D.
Thanx,
Ralf
PS: Please carbon copy ;)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
is :-)
PS: Please carbon copy ;)
Sorry, I can't (side effect of posting to a newsgroup).
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan
-5ae4-4e07-aac5-c41967b5e...@queernet.orggt;amp;Subject=Re:%20Re:
posting (was: Threading)debian-user@lists.debian.org/a
--
Kind Regards
AndrewM
Andrew McGlashan
Broadband Solutions now including VoIP
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
On Jun 22, 2011, at 7:01 AM, lee wrote:
Hm, I wonder why anyone is going to the lengths of replying to digest
messages rather than just subscribing to the list ...
So they don't need to get hundreds of separate messages?! Most people don't treat a digest as
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 06:45 +,
debian-user-digest-requ...@lists.debian.org wrote:
On 23/06/11 00:01, lee wrote:
Scott Ferguson prettyfly.producti...@gmail.com writes:
On 22/06/11 21:53, Camaleón wrote:
On 21/06/11 23:29, Camaleón wrote:
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 09:02 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 06:45 +,
debian-user-digest-requ...@lists.debian.org wrote:
On 23/06/11 00:01, lee wrote:
Scott Ferguson prettyfly.producti...@gmail.com writes:
On 22/06/11 21:53,
On 23/06/11 17:02, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 06:45 +,
debian-user-digest-requ...@lists.debian.org wrote:
On 23/06/11 00:01, lee wrote:
Scott Ferguson prettyfly.producti...@gmail.com writes:
On 22/06/11 21:53, Camaleón wrote:
.
Re: posting Re: debian-user-digest Digest V2011 #1198
instead of
Re: posting
is breaking the thread?
Maybe it works for you in Evolution Ralf - but for me in Icedove you've
just made a(nother) complelling argument for NOT replying to Digest
messages.
For Evolution it usually isn't
the thread.
Re: posting Re: debian-user-digest Digest V2011 #1198
instead of
Re: posting
is breaking the thread?
It no longer is part of the thread in threaded view with Icedove (or
Thunderbird).
*Likewise, in the online version (see In-reply-to):-
http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2011
On 06/23/2011 07:28 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 23/06/11 18:14, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Re: posting Re: debian-user-digest Digest V2011 #1198
instead of
Re: posting
is breaking the thread?
It no longer is part of the thread in threaded view with Icedove (or
Thunderbird).
*Likewise
Scott Ferguson prettyfly.producti...@gmail.com writes:
Scott Ferguson prettyfly.producti...@gmail.com writes:
Hm, I wonder why anyone is going to the lengths of replying to digest
messages rather than just subscribing to the list ...
You could just ask the person
Since he´s following
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net writes:
Re: posting Re: debian-user-digest Digest V2011 #1198
instead of
Re: posting
is breaking the thread?
Yes, your threading is broken, and you need to learn how to post. See,
for example, [1] and [2] and [3].
We have some options here:
1
Wtf.
This thread is just beyond confusing now.
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 6:14 PM, lee l...@yun.yagibdah.de wrote:
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net writes:
Re: posting Re: debian-user-digest Digest V2011 #1198
instead of
Re: posting
is breaking the thread?
Yes, your
On Jo, 23 iun 11, 10:14:23, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
It doesn't happen that often and usually for this list. If standards are
that important, GNU mailman would be the better choice to avoid issues.
What standards are broken by SmartList? (exact RFC please)
Debian isn't fine with Firefox and
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net writes:
Re: posting Re: debian-user-digest Digest V2011 #1198
instead of
Re: posting
is breaking the thread?
Yes, your threading is broken, and you
On Thursday 23 June 2011 19:44:57 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Don't blame me! Blame the way Debian digest is formatted. It's neither
my, nor Evolutions fault, when the digest is bad formatted.
This problem is endemic to digests. Googlemail threads on conversations
which do indeed go by the subject
Resp. the issue is that the mails are not inline for Debian digest. For
GNU mailman Digest the mails are inline.
Perhaps it would be an idea to change this for Debian digest to inline
too.
Note! Computers are made to fit to users workflows, users aren't born to
fit to computers workflows.
Using
On Thursday 23 June 2011 20:17:00 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Btw. some people who recommend that I should use another mailer got
issues with signs ;), such as this one: ó
As I just said, I don't care what email client you chose to use or who is to
blame for what. Find a list whose policies accord
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:44:57PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net writes:
Re: posting Re: debian-user-digest Digest V2011 #1198
instead of
Re: posting
is breaking the thread?
Yes, your threading is broken, and you need to learn how
As already mentioned by others, there are mail clients able to deal with
SmartList's digests. Do yourself a favor and use one of them if you're
so attached to digests (instead of normal subscription).
Perhaps I have a bad day ;), so I'll stop reading here. (Sorry, I miss
other replies
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 06:17:01PM +0100, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]
wrote:
Wtf.
This thread is just beyond confusing now.
Cal, you wrote 2 lines but posted +150, trim please.
I subscribe to the digest and reply to it using mutt
and 'L' rather than 'r'.
I'm just curious if this
On Thursday 23 June 2011 20:52:33 Mike McClain wrote:
I'm just curious if this breaks the thread
Not in KMail. It is threaded correctly.
Lisi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Perhaps I have a bad day ;), so I'll stop reading here. (Sorry, I miss
other replies doing this)
Aaargh, pardon, broken English ... I didn't read other following replies
regarding to this thread, by the current Debian digest, so I might have
missed something.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Not being funny but, both Thunderbird and Google mail auto trim the emails
for me... If your mail client can't support that, then sucks to be you?
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Mike McClain mike.j...@cox.net wrote:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 06:17:01PM +0100, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media
Ltd]
from the
wrong post:
,
| OA ( 126) [Ralf Mardorf ] 'Re: posting
| :R+- ( 164) [Scott Ferguson ] '
| :R| \- ( 49) [Eduardo M KALINOWSKI ] '
| :R+- ( 146) [- debian-u...@lists.de] '
| :R| \- ( 369) [Cal Leeming [Simplicity] '
| :R\- ( 78) [Andrei
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 10:12:49PM +0100, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]
wrote:
Not being funny but, both Thunderbird and Google mail auto trim the emails
for me... If your mail client can't support that, then sucks to be you?
Interesting. How do they know what you don't want to include
On 06/23/11 at 10:14am, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 17:39 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 23/06/11 17:02, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
IMO Digest should be for replies too, not only to lurk the list. You can
read the archive if you only would like to lurk.
While in your opinion
On 24/06/11 03:17, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd] wrote:
Wtf.
This thread is just beyond confusing now.
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 6:14 PM, lee l...@yun.yagibdah.de
mailto:l...@yun.yagibdah.de wrote:
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net
mailto:ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net
email message attachment
Forwarded Message
From: Tom Furie t...@furie.org.uk
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: posting
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 20:49:19 +0100
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:44:57PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard
and try my best to fix the issue, but
sorry everybody, I won't waste time by reading more replies regarding
to posting. I STOP READING AND REPLYING TO THIS THREAD [...]
I appreciate that you're trying to fix the issue, but I think you're
approaching it from the wrong angle. Although since you've
.
And I am in absolute agreement with you!
Hm, I wonder why anyone is going to the lengths of replying to digest
messages rather than just subscribing to the list ...
But then - I also believe if someone top posts there *is* something
wrong. Likewise posting in HTML. Or posting to the list
On Jun 22, 2011, at 7:01 AM, lee wrote:
Hm, I wonder why anyone is going to the lengths of replying to digest
messages rather than just subscribing to the list ...
So they don't need to get hundreds of separate messages?! Most people don't
treat a digest as separate from a list, just an
Roger B.A. Klorese rog...@queernet.org writes:
On Jun 22, 2011, at 7:01 AM, lee wrote:
Hm, I wonder why anyone is going to the lengths of replying to digest
messages rather than just subscribing to the list ...
So they don't need to get hundreds of separate messages?!
They get all the
they desire.
--
Chris Brennan
--
A: Yes.
Q: Are you sure?
A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
http://xkcd.com/84/ | http://xkcd.com/149/ | http://xkcd.com/549/
GPG: D5B20C0C (6741 8EE4 6C7D 11FB 8DA8 9E4A EECD 9A84 D5B2 0C0C
lee writes:
Perhaps the digest can be turned into an mbox file without too much
effort, like just stripping the headers of the container-message, and
thus be treated as if the subscriber received the mailing list not as
a digest but as single messages?
Some MUAs can do just that.
--
John
, and
threading by subject line, work. Not to provide a forensics trail for
the anally retentive.
But then - I also believe if someone top posts there *is* something
wrong. Likewise posting in HTML. Or posting to the list because they are
unable to do something, but then insisting on rudely declaring
On 23/06/11 00:05, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
On Jun 22, 2011, at 7:01 AM, lee wrote:
Hm, I wonder why anyone is going to the lengths of replying to
digest messages rather than just subscribing to the list ...
So they don't need to get hundreds of separate messages?! Most
people don't
On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 21:07 -0500, Mike Mestnik wrote:
So sorry for posting the same thing more then once, I kept getting a
DSN like this:
Whomever runs this should include a message ID or something more then
the subject in the response because I can't discover what email didn't
make
On Wed, 1 Jun 2011, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
The email you sent to debian-user@lists.debian.org was rejected because there
was a validation error.
In order for emails to be accepted by debianHELP:
- They must be sent in reply to a valid notification email.
- The reply must be done from the same
On Mi, 01 iun 11, 15:48:31, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
On Wed, 1 Jun 2011, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
The email you sent to debian-user@lists.debian.org was rejected because
there
was a validation error.
In order for emails to be accepted by debianHELP:
- They must be sent in reply to a valid
So sorry for posting the same thing more then once, I kept getting a DSN
like this:
Whomever runs this should include a message ID or something more then
the subject in the response because I can't discover what email didn't
make it(if any) to the list.
Original Message
Subject
On 03/06/2011 01:38 AM, Doug wrote:
[snip]
A message I wrote in reply to a question on the Kubuntu list may be
of some help.
The message is called Install Win98 on /dev/sda4 and does not
actually install
Windows to /dev/sda4, but to /sdb1. And it's XP, not 98. Anyway,
since it is frowned
on to
On 03/06/2011 03:07 AM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/06/2011 01:38 AM, Doug wrote:
[snip]
A message I wrote in reply to a question on the Kubuntu list may be
of some help.
The message is called Install Win98 on /dev/sda4 and does not
actually install
Windows to /dev/sda4, but to /sdb1. And it's XP,
On 03/06/2011 02:21 AM, Doug wrote:
On 03/06/2011 03:07 AM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/06/2011 01:38 AM, Doug wrote:
[snip]
A message I wrote in reply to a question on the Kubuntu list may be
of some help.
The message is called Install Win98 on /dev/sda4 and does not
actually install
Windows to
On 03/06/2011 05:12 AM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/06/2011 02:21 AM, Doug wrote:
/snip/
since it is frowned
on to cross-post, I will tell you that the message was posted
03/06/2011 at 12:28 AM,
so you can look for it there. (The earlier post was by Jerry Lapham
at 03/05/2011
at 8:14 PM. He
On 03/06/2011 02:53 PM, Doug wrote:
On 03/06/2011 05:12 AM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/06/2011 02:21 AM, Doug wrote:
/snip/
since it is frowned
on to cross-post, I will tell you that the message was posted
03/06/2011 at 12:28 AM,
so you can look for it there. (The earlier post was by Jerry
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 13:55:54 +, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 22:21:48 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Camaleón put forth on 3/3/2010 8:50 AM:
Stan, please, let's calm down.
I'll try again to contact Cosme and explain him the situation. I don't
think he is fully aware of his
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 22:21:48 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Camaleón put forth on 3/3/2010 8:50 AM:
Stan, please, let's calm down.
I'll try again to contact Cosme and explain him the situation. I don't
think he is fully aware of his fault, in fact, rarely replies to other
people's advices in
Hola
Si me dieran 1 centavo por cada vez que leo lo del top-posting, los
correos en html y los privados en la lista no tendría problemas
financieros por el resto de mi vida :)
Las normativas de la lista son claras al respecto:
1- Evitar el uso de HTML
2- Evitar el top-posting
3- Evitar los
Walber Zaldivar Herrera escribió:
Hola
Si me dieran 1 centavo por cada vez que leo lo del top-posting, los
correos en html y los privados en la lista no tendría problemas
financieros por el resto de mi vida :)
Las normativas de la lista son claras al respecto:
1- Evitar el uso de HTML
2
On Mar 01 Dic 2009 14:16:16 JAP escribió:
Walber Zaldivar Herrera escribió:
Hola
Si me dieran 1 centavo por cada vez que leo lo del top-posting, los
correos en html y los privados en la lista no tendría problemas
financieros por el resto de mi vida :)
Las normativas de la lista son
Estimados nuevos (o newbies, si prefieren el inglés).
Son todos bienvenidos a hacer cualquier tipo de pregunta en esta lista,
siempre y cuando vuestras preguntas cumplan estos requisitos:
Se note que hayan leído las “netiquettes”, o normas de convivencias. Si
no lo hicieron, háganlo en
JAP escribió:
Y por si a alguien le queda dudas,
http://download.bblug.usla.org.ar/netiquette.png
JAP
Jajajajajajajajajajajajajaja :) :) :)
s...@lu2
Walber
--
JHS/o
+-===|
(o_
//\Linux Registered User
V_/_ #480598
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-spanish-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
2009/3/30, santilin sa...@gestiong.org:
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-spanish-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
wikipedia es tu amiga ;)
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Env
santilin escribió:
Top-posting es contestar arriba del mensaje respondido en vez de abajo,
cosa que hace incómoda la lectura:
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting
Cross-posting es preguntar lo mismo en varias listas, lo que ocasiona
cierta mescolanza cuando alguien responde:
http
2009/3/28 Chris Jones cjns1...@gmail.com
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 05:48:10AM EDT, Chris Bannister wrote:
I was asking one of the top-posting advocates to elaborate on archaic
mail readers .. written in the 1980s .. I believe he wrote..
I would assume he is not using one himself
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 01:30:15PM +, Bob Cox wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 01:06:11 +1300, Chris Bannister
(mockingb...@earthlight.co.nz) wrote:
[...]
It was mentioned that inline posting and deleting unnecessary text is a
better method, but that was shrugged off as being too
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 05:48:26AM EDT, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 06:11:38PM -0400, Chris Jones wrote:
Now then.. I have two bottom posters .. and one top poster..
OK.
What do I do?
Snip out the irrelevant bits. Do you use vim as your editor? If so you
can put a
is using if you put in your .muttrc:
I was asking one of the top-posting advocates to elaborate on archaic
mail readers .. written in the 1980s .. I believe he wrote..
I would assume he is not using one himself .. but then who knows..
-
# What headers are displayed
ignore *
unignore From
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 01:04:54PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
Chris Bannister wrote:
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting.
No. You obviously should middle post as I have done here: find the median
line and insert your comments is the center of it, splitting
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 10:43:28AM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Chris Bannister wrote:
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting.
Then, of course, it follows that not posting at all is ideal.
I *should* have said:
Without triming bottom posting
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 06:08:35PM -0400, Chris Jones wrote:
What mailer are you referring to? I use mutt and it threads messages
reliably, flagging malformed mails that it adds to a thread when it
You can see what mailer he is using if you put in your .muttrc:
-
# What headers are
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 06:11:38PM -0400, Chris Jones wrote:
Now then.. I have two bottom posters .. and one top poster..
OK.
What do I do?
Snip out the irrelevant bits. Do you use vim as your editor? If so you
can put a number before the 'dd' command: 40dd will delete 40 lines.
--
Chris.
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:40:14AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2009-03-22 11:45, Chris Bannister wrote:
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting.
The only person who can say that with a straight face is one who has
spent too much time using Windows.
Or who reads
On 2009-03-24 07:06, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:40:14AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2009-03-22 11:45, Chris Bannister wrote:
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting.
The only person who can say that with a straight face is one who has
spent
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 01:06:11 +1300, Chris Bannister
(mockingb...@earthlight.co.nz) wrote:
[...]
It was mentioned that inline posting and deleting unnecessary text is a
better method, but that was shrugged off as being too confusing. :o
So in that situation I was happier[2] seeing a silly
On Tue,24.Mar.09, 13:30:15, Bob Cox wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 01:06:11 +1300, Chris Bannister
(mockingb...@earthlight.co.nz) wrote:
[...]
It was mentioned that inline posting and deleting unnecessary text is a
better method, but that was shrugged off as being too confusing. :o
So
Christofer C. Bell wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Barclay, Daniel dan...@fgm.com
mailto:dan...@fgm.com wrote:
Christofer C. Bell wrote:
Mail 1: Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Mail 2: A: Top-posting.
Mail 3: Q: Why is top-posting such a bad
; are you trying to humiliate people into using bottom posting by
associating them with use of Windows?
The debate of top/bottom posting is much alike elbows on/off the table,
burp/not burp after a meal, etc,
Hmmm. Manners or No Manners; it's an easy choice.
Bottom posting of course
On Sunday 22 March 2009 23:07:29 Dave Patterson wrote:
* Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. b...@iguanasuicide.net [2009-03-22 20:34:50 -0500]:
That's hyperbole, at the very least. The original Pentium was released on
March 22, 1993. 3 1/2 disks had been available for a while. While the
first GB disk
Christofer C. Bell wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net
mailto:ron.l.john...@cox.net wrote:
On 2009-03-22 11:45, Chris Bannister wrote:
...
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting
or one?
If it's one:
That's a good example of bottom posting (quoting what's being replied to
(got my fax?) for context about the reply (got it).
If it's two:
How can you argue that there's no need for context? Without context, when
someone writes Yeah, got it..., how can the recipient know which
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Barclay, Daniel dan...@fgm.com wrote:
Christofer C. Bell wrote:
Mail 1: Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Mail 2: A: Top-posting.
Mail 3: Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Mail 4: A: Because it messes up the order in which people
In 143f0f6c0903230837k4d6bc8a5r55fe985e82993...@mail.gmail.com, Christofer
C. Bell wrote:
What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Top-posting.
What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Top-posting.
Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
What
.. all parties know what the fax
is about..
Does that example represent two message or one?
If it's one:
That's a good example of bottom posting (quoting what's being replied to
(got my fax?) for context about the reply (got it).
If it's two:
How can you argue that there's no need
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 10:37:21AM -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Barclay, Daniel dan...@fgm.com wrote:
Christofer C. Bell wrote:
Mail 1: Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Mail 2: A: Top-posting.
Mail 3: Q: Why is top-posting
' messages to my
Possible SPAM folder, which I don't check until after I've read the rest
of the my mail. When everyone has included relevant context (and not too
much of it) the discussion is still easy to follow.
The most common arguments for bottom-posting are based on the mail reader
people
Johnson wrote:
On 2009-03-22 12:27, Jesus Arocho wrote:
Hee, Hee; are you trying to humiliate people into using bottom posting by
associating them with use of Windows?
The debate of top/bottom posting is much alike elbows on/off the table,
burp/not burp after a meal, etc,
Hmmm
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 04:09:29AM -0700, Angus Auld wrote:
[snipped **H E A P S** of unnecessary text]
Proof reading might also be a good idea, as is evidenced by my mistakenly
saying that top-posting is the established method here. ;)
Bottom-posting of course is the prevailing method
On 2009-03-22 11:45, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 04:09:29AM -0700, Angus Auld wrote:
[snipped **H E A P S** of unnecessary text]
Proof reading might also be a good idea, as is evidenced by my mistakenly
saying that top-posting is the established method here. ;)
Bottom
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net wrote:
On 2009-03-22 11:45, Chris Bannister wrote:
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting.
The only person who can say that with a straight face is one who has spent
too much time using Windows
Hee, Hee; are you trying to humiliate people into using bottom posting by
associating them with use of Windows?
The debate of top/bottom posting is much alike elbows on/off the table,
burp/not burp after a meal, etc,
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting
On 2009-03-22 12:27, Jesus Arocho wrote:
Hee, Hee; are you trying to humiliate people into using bottom posting by
associating them with use of Windows?
The debate of top/bottom posting is much alike elbows on/off the table,
burp/not burp after a meal, etc,
Hmmm. Manners or No Manners
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Chris Bannister wrote:
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting.
Then, of course, it follows that not posting at all is ideal.
--
Bob Holtzman
Light a man's fire and he will be warm for a night.
Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest
-posting such a bad thing?
Mail 2: A: Top-posting.
Mail 1: Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Your example looks like this in a threaded mail reader:
doesn't mean everyone else has to be. ;-)
which, incidentally, support HTML email). Because *you* are a curmudgeon
ago. ;-) Top
On Sunday 22 March 2009 17:18:44 Ron Johnson wrote:
The debate of top/bottom posting is much alike elbows on/off the table,
burp/not burp after a meal, etc,
Hmmm. Manners or No Manners; it's an easy choice.
No - the poster has a valid point. Both the cases he cites are cases where
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:52:54 -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2009-03-22 11:45, Chris Bannister wrote:
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting.
The only person who can say that with a straight face
Chris Bannister wrote:
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting.
No. You obviously should middle post as I have done here: find the median
line and insert your comments is the center of it, splitting a word if
necessary.
Bob Holtzman writes:
Then, of course
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 11:52:54 -0500
Christofer C. Bell christofer.c.b...@gmail.com wrote:
...
This isn't true. Come enter the 21st Century, it started nearly a decade
ago. ;-) Top posting works well in a modern threaded mail reader (all of
which, incidentally, support HTML email). Because
On 2009-03-22 11:52, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net wrote:
On 2009-03-22 11:45, Chris Bannister wrote:
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting.
The only person who can say that with a straight face
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 13:27:13 -0400
Jesus Arocho jesus_aro...@comcast.net wrote:
Hee, Hee; are you trying to humiliate people into using bottom posting by
associating them with use of Windows?
The debate of top/bottom posting is much alike elbows on/off the table,
burp/not burp after
In non-tech lists, top-posting suggests that the writer is (a)
unaware that Westerners read from top down, or (b) unable to edit
plain text. Or both.
Debian-users ought not wish to appear so inconsiderate incompetent.
Wendell Cochran
West Seattle
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 01:04:54PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
Chris Bannister wrote:
Bottom posting of course is just as bad or worse than top posting.
No. You obviously should middle post as I have done here: find the median
ROTF
line and insert your comments is the center of it, splitting
On 2009-03-22 14:28, Celejar wrote:
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 13:27:13 -0400
Jesus Arocho jesus_aro...@comcast.net wrote:
Hee, Hee; are you trying to humiliate people into using bottom posting by
associating them with use of Windows?
The debate of top/bottom posting is much alike elbows on/off
On 2009-03-22 14:32, Wendell Cochran wrote:
In non-tech lists, top-posting suggests that the writer is (a)
unaware that Westerners read from top down, or (b) unable to edit
plain text. Or both.
Debian-users ought not wish to appear so inconsiderate incompetent.
Or... only technically-astute
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net wrote:
Or... only technically-astute people should be allowed on the Internet.
That way, it doesn't degenerate into the Intarweb of tubes and spam.
I remember the days before 1994 and the Great AOL Floodgates opening...
--
2009/3/23 Christofer C. Bell christofer.c.b...@gmail.com:
This isn't true. Come enter the 21st Century, it started nearly a decade
ago. ;-) Top posting works well in a modern threaded mail reader (all of
which, incidentally, support HTML email). Because *you* are a curmudgeon
doesn't mean
* Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net [2009-03-22 16:06:06 -0500]:
Except that Our arguments are Right, and Theirs are Eeeevil.
Here we go. I can imagine the hearings now:
Are you now, or have you ever been, a top poster?
--
Dave
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
* Christofer C. Bell christofer.c.b...@gmail.com [2009-03-22 16:24:52 -0500]:
I remember the days before 1994 and the Great AOL Floodgates opening...
A 286 accelerator card in an 8086 IBM with a 20 Mg hard drive and 5 1/4
floppy drive. 56k modem. Hotrod machine for the day.
I don't miss
401 - 500 of 1302 matches
Mail list logo
