BillK wrote: > 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, Why do you assume few need it? > > And wrong again. The new stuff should be right below what you are quoting, > > so that the references are as clear as can be. Among other reasons. > > 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. Any particular reason why you leave the above useless quote bloat? > 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. I generally get over 200 a day, and top replies take twice the time to read having to scroll down for the context required to understand what the message is really saying. One cannot remember the whole upthread, if any at all, so beginning at the beginning instead of upside down bass ackwards like on Jeopardy is most efficient. Plus, as pointed out above, bottom reply makes the quoting clearer. Also, one replying at the bottom can see what is replied to immediately above and thereby be reminded to strip out the bloat of quoted .sigs and list instructions. Ideally, one would intersperse point by point so context becomes unmistakable. -- A fool finds no pleasure in understanding, but delights in airing his own opinions. Proverbs 18:2 NKJV Team OS/2 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.members.atlantic.net
Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
