On Mar 28, 10:38 pm, "John Beckett" <johnb.beck...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's been a while since I've posted my pleas for people to
> follow list guidelines because it is annoying for readers, and
> annoying to me. With more encouragement (say a weekly "I agree"
> to show that it's not just my POV), I could resume.
>
I could certainly go along with posting a weekly "here's the rules of
the list" email, but I don't think it would be of much use. I assume
(perhaps incorrectly) that most offenders simply read threads started
with their own questions and not much else.
> I suspect Bram might not favour a
> "three strikes and you're out" rule, but despite the recent
> avalanche of the quick-clickers we probably are not yet at the
> stage of banning people. It might not hurt to occasionally point
> out that the list DOES have a policy, and COULD decline to
> receive messages from repeat offenders.
>
Actually, another list policy might help out here.
Rather than RESPONDING to a person that does not follow our guidelines
out of ignorance, we could send a reply consisting of nothing but a
link to our policy or perhaps a copy of it. Right now, they may get
our "this is our policy, follow it, darn it!" message, but they also
get all the answers they were looking for from other members. Where is
the motivation to change?
If they later re-post correctly, or with a valid reason why it would
be very difficult to follow our policy in their specific case
(bascially showing us that they care enough to try), then we can care
enough to respond.
For those that argue against the bottom-posting policy, I (like many
on the list) have no personal feelings on the overall superiority of
one method over another. There are many places where top-posting is
better than bottom-posting. For emails in the business realm, for
example, where an email goes from one person to the next, almost never
to a large open group, and tend to stick to a single topic, with only
one person responsible at a time.
The vim_use list, however, is NOT one of those places where top-
posting is better than bottom-posting. For one, it is a technical
forum, where it is often much easier and clearer to interleave a
response with quotes from the question. For another, thousands of
people can potentially read your message and interject at any time,
and bottom-posting can help make it clearer precisely what point they
are responding to. Finally, and MOST importantly, vim_use has an
established custom (or even policy) of bottom posting. While it may be
inconvient for you to change your habits for this one list, it is
considered very rude in most societies to willfully go against
established customs for no reason other than preferring another. "When
in Rome..." as the expression goes. Reply style is a small enough
thing that you should not be violating any of your moral beliefs or
anything by placing your text in a different location.
For the record, I personally respond to most emails at work in a top-
post style. This is the custom where I work, it is often easier to
follow the short email chains that go around, and it is in a realm
where this makes sense. I will occasionally use a bottom-posting style
(though our required email client makes this difficult) for messages
that warrant it (such as emails containing 5 or 6 separate questions).
But for this list and related communication, I bottom-post every time.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
