If you're posting to this list by logging in to https://groups.google.com/
rather than via email, I'd like to propose that you write your reply above
the quoted message to which you're replying. If you do this, the digest
emails that most subscribers get will be easily previewable from their
em
On Jun 4, 2013, at 1:14 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote:
> If you're posting to this list by logging in to https://groups.google.com/
> rather than via email, I'd like to propose that you write your reply above
> the quoted message to which you're replying. If you do this, the digest
> emails that most su
I think I just posted a quick reply and I wasn't sure whether to quote
above or below, but from now on I'll be glad to post in the way that
provides easier readability for everyone.
For long proposals, I'll keep replying below quotes for exactly the same
reason.
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Do
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote:
> Thoughts?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
--
Javier
--
You received this message because you are subs
Certainly, when a user is replying to portions of a quoted text separately
(as Russel often does) it is helpful to break up the quoted text into
actionable sections and reply below each. However, when a user is simply
clicking the "Post Reply" button, chances are, it's going to be easier to
rea
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013, Yo-Yo Ma wrote:
>If you're posting to this list by logging in to https://groups.google.com/
>rather than via email, I'd like to propose that you write your reply above
>the quoted message to which you're replying.
I think that would be a bad idea.
>The way it stands now,
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote:
> Thoughts?
>
> I think we should all continue to write messages the way we deem best on
an email by email basis. The content of the message is more important than
whether we reply above or below and it's basically impossible for everyone
to consist
On 4 Jun 2013, at 12:00 PM, Daniele Procida wrote:
> * quote what needs to be quoted for context
> * don't quote anything that doesn't need to be quoted
This is, I think, the most useful/important point. There's no need to include a
whole string of previous messages in later ones; this isn't 198
Can we PLEASE not have this argument? It's literally as old as email
itself, and totally futile.
Drop it. Now.
Jacob
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Wim Lewis wrote:
>
> On 4 Jun 2013, at 12:00 PM, Daniele Procida wrote:
>> * quote what needs to be quoted for context
>> * don't quote anything t