On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 8:13 AM, wrote:
> > 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 on Usenet and in e-mail?
&
On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 12:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >It's funny b/c I see these happen all the time on lists that /do/ offer
> >the footer.
>
> I do too :) And, as has oft been stated before, and will no doubt be
> stated again, technology is not the solution for what is a human
> behavior
In a message dated: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 11:58:19 EST
Erik Price said:
>> If you've ever
>> been a list manager and inundated with requests from subscribers to
>> 'please unsubscribe me from this list', then you'd quickly come to
>> appreciate these footers.
>
>It's funny b/c I see these happen al
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Regardless, AFAIK, all lists managed by MailMan add the following
lines to the header:
X-BeenThere:
X-Mailman-Version:
List-Help:
List-Post:
List-Subscribe:
List-Id:
List-Unsubscribe:
List-Archive:
I really like mailing lists that use MailMan and I think it's
erleaving, with an added 1-liner as an intro.
Right, which I think confused me, because you also said:
>> If everyone top-posted, the thread would be intact,
It seemed that you were advocating top posting with the occasional
interleaved comments. Top-posting a small comment which has nothi
gt;To: David Andrew - Sun MDE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-Seen-This: pll
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Top posting
>X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13
>List-Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>List-Post: <mailto:
In a message dated: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 12:06:35 EST
David Andrew - Sun MDE said:
>If everyone top-posted, the thread would be intact, and it would save a
>lot of wasted time searching through the message to get the part added
>with the new e-mail.
It would also make every e-mail incredibly huge
Hi folks,
Just my opinion - there's more than one "correct" way to go here ...
I would personally much rather see top posting, even if it was only a
line saying "comments interleaved", where applicable.
If everyone top-posted, the thread would be intact, and it would s
consequences. Well I hope that my
future actions will speak louder than my previous words.
> Otherwise a polite acknowledgement is all that is needed. Mike's
> original request to avoid top posting was terse but polite, and should
> be viewed by all for what it is: a polite request f
On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 03:45 PM, Derek Martin wrote:
One thing I've noticed is that any discussion about this sort of
thing
invariably causes more aggravation and uses more bandwidth than the
original
transgression. :-)
More often than not, said aggravation is, I think, the result of t
So, how 'bout them Linux - ain't they sumthin!
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, at 2:16pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've found that taking up extra bandwidth for this sort of conversation
> thread is just as inconsiderate as not following any other general rule.
One thing I've noticed is that any discussion about this sort of thing
invariably causes mo
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:16:20PM -0500, Dana S. Tellier wrote:
> Let's just call it even at this point, shall we, because the whole
> argument is getting rather petty. From my lurking over the past few
> years, I've found that taking up extra bandwidth for this sort of
> conversation threa
> I see the emphasis on "guideline", which means it's recommended, but
> not written in stone. If the rest of the community has a problem
> with my sig, I'll change it. But trying to through netiquette back
> in my face is rather petty, don't you think?
Let's just call it even at this
ust because I have 'done' top posting doesn't mean I always do. And
>where did I say my laziness was more important?
When you stated:
>>>>> On 6 Mar 2003, "Jeff" == Jeff Macdonald wrote:
Jeff> I've done top posting because I'm to lazy
;ve never considered him a mission :)
>
:-) Sorry Mike.
< harsh stuff deleted >
> I don't mean to sound unusually harsh, however, the idea that your
> personal laziness is more important than being considerate to others
> in this community I find totally intolerable.
Just
In a message dated: 07 Mar 2003 10:19:30 EST
Jeff Macdonald said:
>On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 17:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> On 6 Mar 2003, at 4:43pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > I've done top posting because I'm to lazy ...
>>
>> You can stop there.
>>>>> On 6 Mar 2003, "Jeff" == Jeff Macdonald wrote:
Jeff> Mike, You seem to be a mission.
You know, I've thought and called mike a lot of things over the
years, but I've never considered him a mission :)
Jeff> I've done top posting because I
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 17:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 6 Mar 2003, at 4:43pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I've done top posting because I'm to lazy ...
>
> You can stop there. I see your problem. :-)
Not entirely. Regarding Derek's comments about what too
On 6 Mar 2003, at 4:43pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've done top posting because I'm to lazy ...
You can stop there. I see your problem. :-)
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do |
| not represent the
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 15:17, mike ledoux wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Please don't top post, it breaks up the flow of conversation.
Mike,
You seem to be a mission. I've done top posting because I'm to lazy to
delete all the text t
21 matches
Mail list logo
