Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(November 2005)

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: Posting style filters?
From: lee <davislee @ btinternet . com>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 02:26:30 +0000
To: list-managers @ greatcircle . com
In-reply-to: <v031303bcbfaabdc089a1 @ [192 . 168 . 123 . 10]>
References: <20051124000638 . GA23161 @ firedrake . org> <20051124000638 . GA23161 @ firedrake . org> <v031303bcbfaabdc089a1 @ [192 . 168 . 123 . 10]>
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)

hello Charlie,

I appreciate this is doing nothing to help Roger with his query, by the way ...

I agree and understand, however I personally still feel that the composition technique, as long as it is legible, isn't a significant issue.

Just for the sake of interest, I choose to top-post and include all or part of the previous email, for these reasons :

1) I feel it is more appropriate to present the reader straight away with the 'new' content which I am offering in my reply.

2) If the reader feels any interest in putting my reply into context, they can scroll down and see what I am replying to.

I do however not use top-posting if I am replying to various different parts of an email, in which case I would use the 'quoting and replying beneath' technique. Dare I say it, in those scenarios, I also consider using html and a slightly different text colour to contrast more clearly with the quoted original.
It's fair to say I'm not a purist ! ;-)

I am however very interested in making my mail lists as 'neat' as possible, and I process all plain text mails via Demime pretty much only to use its 'advertising signature removal' to strip out any pre-existing list footers. (which are always the same) I allow html mails and do not Demime them at all, so as not to remove the author's intended formating.

It's fair to say I'm not a purist ! ;-)

Just my perspective,

Charlie Summers wrote:

At 7:40 PM -0500 11/23/05, lee typed:

However do you really feel that top-posting is a technique which is bad
enough to warrant being bounced?

  Absolutely. Top-posting never did make a lick of sense. It encourages
quoting entire messages (including signatures, footers, etc., etc.) and
_discourages_ quoting for context only.

Or indeed 'too much' quoting?

  Lord yes. Over-quoting is the bane of modern maling lists; lok at your
message,. We all just read Roger's mail, yet you (or more accurately, your
email client) somehow thought it a good idea to repeat it in its entirety to
the entire list.

  Again, makes no sense, and wastes bandwidth. In this reply, I _only_ quote
what is relevant to my responses, and no more. The "Q/A" format is easier to
comprehend, and indeed was THE standard until Microsloth decided with the
release of Outlook Express many moons ago to encourage sloppiness. (I have
often wondered if this was just another example of an intentional change to
convention to show everyone who was boss...)

If one or more readers don't personally like an email to be structured
in such a way, and actively object to it, I would feel they are petty

  You'd really hate my lists as a poster, since the _maintainer_ objects to
such nonsense and enforces good netiquette. Of course, the vast majority of
subscribers who are readers and _not_ posters appreciate it, since the s/n
ratio and comprehendibility is much higher than seeing forwards of signatures
of forwards of footers of...


A perfect internet companion: LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION <>
Example recent playlist HERE <>

Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Posting style filters?
From: Charlie Summers <charlie @ lofcom . com>
Next: Re: Posting style filters?
From: Vince Sabio <vince @ vjs . org>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Posting style filters?
From: Charlie Summers <charlie @ lofcom . com>
Next: Re: Posting style filters?
From: Jim Osborn <jimo @ eskimo . com>

Search Internet Search