In the context of a long thread about style and readability[*] Joel M. Halpern
summarized:
I do want to re-iterate two points I have seen that are important. Both are
relevant no matter what style of posting you like.
1) People need to read the whole email before composing their
NEW NON-IETF LIST ANNOUNCEMENT
IETF Meta-Discussions
This group is dedicated to the discussion of ancillary issues of
interest to the IETF community, especially discussions about how IETF
discussions and meetings should work.
-- IETF meeting locations / travel
-- Email composition design
On Mon Sep 27 15:37:56 2010, Richard L. Barnes wrote:
This group is dedicated to the discussion of ancillary issues of
interest to the IETF community, especially discussions about how
IETF discussions and meetings should work.
Oh, I thought it was the technical rubbish that was off-topic
On 22 Sep 2010, at 19:48, Tony Finch wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010, Dave Cridland wrote:
Possibly. It's worth noting that format-flowed, for instance, is well
supported
with the notable exception of Outlook. Apple's MUAs have stopped using
format=flowed and now use really long lines
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
Just out of curiosity, where did you get confirmation that Apple Mail
behaves the way it does for the reason it does?
Can't remember, sorry.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/
HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT PORTLAND: NORTH
--On Thursday, September 23, 2010 10:43 -0700 Randy Dunlap
rdun...@xenotime.net wrote:
...
the same people also complain when I trim.
So its a combination of pathological behaviours, UI, and
dominance behaviour
That should just be a function of where the UI software
positions the
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:09:08 -0400 John C Klensin wrote:
--On Thursday, September 23, 2010 10:43 -0700 Randy Dunlap
rdun...@xenotime.net wrote:
...
the same people also complain when I trim.
So its a combination of pathological behaviours, UI, and
dominance behaviour
That
I tend to assume that people write emails the way they would like to
read them.
Thus, if I am writing an email with a lot of detailed context from a
previous message, I include the revelant portions of the message, and
reply in line.
However, when I am writing A reply that does not require
On Sep 24, 2010, at 11:36 AM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
I tend to assume that people write emails the way they would like to read
them.
Thus, if I am writing an email with a lot of detailed context from a previous
message, I include the revelant portions of the message, and reply in line.
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, John C Klensin wrote:
FWIW, the thing that really irritates me is having someone respond to a
message after quoting only a few lines (often good) but without
supplying some clue that permits me to find the message being replied to
if needed. [...] or even using a good
--On Friday, September 24, 2010 08:17 -0700 Randy Dunlap
rdun...@xenotime.net wrote:
One thing that bothers me is when people do mixed-line posting
but end their reply say, 50% thru the message, but then they
don't delete the rest of the message, so the reader has to scan
the rest of the
Tony == Tony Finch d...@dotat.at writes:
Tony On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, John C Klensin wrote:
FWIW, the thing that really irritates me is having someone
respond to a message after quoting only a few lines (often good)
but without supplying some clue that permits me to find the
UI like the iPhone make top-post for short responses almost unavoidably easier.
7 vital signs of a with-it manager from mars or venus (your choice) books
very probably also recommend it, I notice that people who move from strict
technical roles into managerial ones are very prone to doing a +1
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:07:34 +1000 George Michaelson wrote:
UI like the iPhone make top-post for short responses almost unavoidably
easier.
7 vital signs of a with-it manager from mars or venus (your choice) books
very probably also recommend it, I notice that people who move from
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010, George Michaelson wrote:
So its a combination of pathological behaviours, UI, and dominance behaviour
Or perhaps they find the ability to quickly regain context useful give the
continuous variety of topics they handle ... or perhaps they feel that
trimming is quoting
I agree
George Michaelson kirjoitti:
UI like the iPhone make top-post for short responses almost unavoidably easier.
7 vital signs of a with-it manager from mars or venus (your choice) books very probably also
recommend it, I notice that people who move from strict technical roles into
On Sep 22, 2010, at 7:07 PM, George Michaelson wrote:
UI like the iPhone make top-post for short responses almost unavoidably
easier.
7 vital signs of a with-it manager from mars or venus (your choice) books
very probably also recommend it, I notice that people who move from strict
Dave,
The
primary argument in favour of inline responses is that they allow
context to be retained.
Yes. Context is essential to understanding why a comment is being made.
For instance, the poster may support or disagree with a particular
assertion expressed earlier in the discussion.
On Sep 22, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
Dave,
The primary argument in favour of inline responses is that they allow
context to be retained.
Yes. Context is essential to understanding why a comment is being made. For
instance, the poster may support or disagree with a particular
On Wed Sep 22 16:57:45 2010, Keith Moore wrote:
On Sep 22, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
However, sometimes I see posters on some lists fall back on a
simpler form of retaining context, where the unabridged discussion
history gets quoted on all new messages. I don't know if we slip
- Original Message -
From: Martin Rex m...@sap.com
To: Randy Dunlap rdun...@xenotime.net
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 7:54 PM
Stripping quoted text to the relevant would be a HUGE improvement.
Some Mails arrive with quotations that are extremely hard to read,
I read the post that I was replying to.
Given that the poster was claiming Rod Beckstrom as the inspiration for the
Tea Party, I did not consider the actual contents of the book very relevant
since the fallacies in the original post are that the Tea Party is a
decentralized movement and that its
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010, Dave Cridland wrote:
Possibly. It's worth noting that format-flowed, for instance, is well
supported
... with the notable exception of Outlook. Apple's MUAs have stopped using
format=flowed and now use really long lines instead, because that give
better interop with the
On Sep 22, 2010, at 12:35 PM, t.petch wrote:
Would that I could change my quoting style. My MUA, supplied by the
organisation that supplies most of the world's MUAs, will put in a greater
than
sign as a quoting char provided you sent me 7bit .
But should you use quoted-printable, then
On Sep 20, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
One of the problems I have seen emerge on many IETF mailing lists is the
habit of fisking.
Please clarify what you mean by fisking.
By fisking I mean responding to a post line by line *while reading it for
the first time*.
Thanks.
On 21 Sep 2010, at 09:44, Nathaniel Borenstein wrote:
On Sep 20, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
One of the problems I have seen emerge on many IETF mailing lists is the
habit of fisking.
Please clarify what you mean by fisking.
By fisking I mean responding to a post line
Fisking ... it sounds naughty :-). No blogger jargon aqui (I mean me).
J
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On 9/21/2010 1:44 AM, Nathaniel Borenstein wrote:
On Sep 20, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
One of the problems I have seen emerge on many IETF mailing lists is the
habit of fisking.
Please clarify what you mean by fisking.
By fisking I mean responding to a post line by
On 9/21/2010 5:49 AM, todd glassey wrote:
On 9/21/2010 1:44 AM, Nathaniel Borenstein wrote:
On Sep 20, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
One of the problems I have seen emerge on many IETF mailing lists is the
habit of fisking.
Please clarify what you mean by fisking.
By
On Sep 21, 2010, at 8:08 AM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
Fisking ... it sounds naughty :-). No blogger jargon aqui (I mean me).
I'll admit it...I was really disappointed to learn how Phillip had defined that
word. I think the word should be reserved for something naughtier.
And yes, top posting
Well afaik we should ask Robert Fisk about it.
But Phillip has the tendency to also post comments (top, bottom,
inline, sideways and upside down) without reading the source he is
making the comment about, like @CircleID regarding Beckstrom's book
The Starfish and Spider (read the book it's quite
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 05:49:55 -0700 todd glassey wrote:
On 9/21/2010 1:44 AM, Nathaniel Borenstein wrote:
On Sep 20, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
One of the problems I have seen emerge on many IETF mailing lists is the
habit of fisking.
Please clarify what you mean
I agree that regarding the other poster as an 'opponent' is bad. This is
meant to be a consensus based organization, not a debating society where
form is more important than substance and the objective is to score points.
That is kinda what I was trying to get at.
Line by line comments certainly
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:20:03 -0400, Phillip Hallam-Baker
hal...@gmail.com said:
PH One of the problems I have seen emerge on many IETF mailing lists is the
PH habit of fisking.
This could all be solved by moving IETF discussions to Google Wave.
Then I could start responding to your thought
This is the sort of thread I usually don't respond to, but we have this debate
about top-posting so often I just can't resist this time. (Must have been
something in my coffee.)
Personally, I don't care whether people bottom-post, top-post, or comment
in-line. What I dearly wish for (but do
http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=Fk1f9uP42D0feature=related
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972 Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: o...@cisco.com URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
___
On Tue Sep 21 18:01:03 2010, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=Fk1f9uP42D0feature=related
So trolling is a specific form of fisking. Makes sense.
Dave.
--
Dave Cridland - mailto:d...@cridland.net - xmpp:d...@dave.cridland.net
-
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 05:49:55 -0700 todd glassey wrote:
The real issue here is that this is a mailing list and synchronization
of messages is nearly impossible through the IETF lists as they exist.
As a result of this really stupid, stone-age methodology any number
On Sep 21, 2010, at 1:44 AM, Nathaniel Borenstein wrote:
In all seriousness, forcing any particular approach is the real issue. I
can't imagine how it would be accomplished. What I'd really like to force
people to do is be more thoughtful and restrained; if they did that, it
wouldn't
One of the problems I have seen emerge on many IETF mailing lists is the
habit of fisking.
By fisking I mean responding to a post line by line *while reading it for
the first time*.
Now sometimes a line by line response is entirely appropriate. If someone
raises six different issues, you want
On Mon Sep 20 19:20:03 2010, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
Traditionally, top-posting (or bottom posting) has been discouraged
in favor
of responding line by line. I think it is time to reverse that
preference.
The primary argument in favour of inline responses is that they allow
context
I take your point that the whole message should be read before replying.
Thank you. However, one can top-post and bottom-post without reading a
message just as well as one can when interleaving a reply :-). Reply
style is separate from the first issue (people should read their mail
fully),
Scott Brim scott.b...@gmail.com wrote:
btw top-posting is not the spawn of evil demons, it's perfectly
appropriate in some situations, e.g. this one, where the original mail
is just attached for possible reference.
Aha!
(Scott can take care of himself without feeling the need to
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:59:13 -0400 John Leslie wrote:
Scott Brim scott.b...@gmail.com wrote:
btw top-posting is not the spawn of evil demons, it's perfectly
appropriate in some situations, e.g. this one, where the original mail
is just attached for possible reference.
Aha!
44 matches
Mail list logo
