I disagree, put the new text at the top - or see your message end up in
trash - most of the time I cant bother scrolling down unless its
something I am really interested in, and unless there is enough test
within view, how do I know - the subject line is generally too little
info?  Same deal with quoting (which I presume someone posted too much),
dont get too vigorous in deleting, short yes, but leave enough meat so
someone can come in on a thread and at least know enough to follow
without having to dig up old messages, which may not be available - I
often just bulk delete when busy (get approx 150 messages a day, with
only short periods to read em!), then sometimes finding something
interesting in the middle of a thread.  If you take the time to write,
at least try and make it easy for your intended audience or your words
are wasted.

BillK

Alexander Skwar wrote:
> 
> So sprach John Wittkamper am Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 09:42:56AM -0800:
> > Not only that, the new stuff should be at the TOP of the reply
> > rather than the bottom. For the few that need context, it is there,
> 
> And wrong again.  The new stuff should be right below what you are quoting,
> so that the references are as clear as can be.
> 
> Now compare my message in size to your "bloated" IMO message.  It's smaller.
> Isn't that better?  If you need context, go back to the original message.
> Ain't that hard.
> 
> Alexander Skwar
> --
> Homepage:       http://www.digitalprojects.com | http://www.dp.ath.cx
> Sichere Mail?   Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] fuer GnuPG Keys
> ICQ:            7328191
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com:
> Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.

Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: 
Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.

Reply via email to