[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: arsclist Top vs. Bottom Posting (and other gripes)...
At 04:37 PM 12/16/2002 -0500, stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
See end of message...
(btw, what about intersperesed-comment posting? It makes it easier to see
what is being said about which, but is often hard to figure out which is
post and which is answer...?
As I think I noted before, it threatens to split the thread. The 'cure' is
to define separate threads when interlineated (interspersed) replies are
used and only some are selected for continuation.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Premise Checker" <checker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > NOTE: Please use bottom posting unless you have a compelling reason not
to.
> > It facilitates removing extraneous quotation and certainly encourages
> > deleting the reduplicated ads.
<sig snipped - once is enough>
> Mike, I've never seen a format where bottom posting is best. This is true
> of the UNIX programs, Pine for e-mail, trn and tin for newsgroups, and of
> Outlook and Outlook Express for both. This issue has received a certain
> amount of attention, and I recall that the Germans prefer bottom
> posting but that most everyone else prefers top posting. We could take a
> poll.
>
> I use Pine and Lynx (for the web), since they are fastest. I can telnet
> into my account from anywhere, too.
>
> What I most dislike is the use of HTML in e-mails and failure to wrap
> lines at, say, 72 characters. Also those who fail to strip off the
> graphics and related junk when forwarding a webpage as e-mail.
>
> Frank
1) Both of the above gripes, as well as top vs. bottom reply (in some cases)
are due to incorrect settings in e-mail programs...and most of us here,
being
expert librarians, discographers, usw. know SFA about e-mail programs
and how to change the settings (and the programmers often make it a
complicated task, too!) First, in many cases HTML e-mail is the default,
and many users stick with defaults (also, some programs automatically
answer HTML with HTML).
Leaving defaults is even more dangerous than sending HTML.
Second, most e-mails program wrap the
text in *displays* but do not do so in the outgoing message by inserting
hard carriage returns (and it's almost impossible to count characters
when display fonts are proportional rather than fixed-width!).
They can be set for no wrap, in which case wrap is defined by the reader's
client. That is how my mail is sent (from Eudora). With very rare
exceptions, I prefer to have the recipient define the appearance she
prefers. By using HTML or by setting line length, I would dictate
appearance for the user.
Now, some further gripes (most often seen on other lists as opposed
to this one)...
1) DO NOT quote entire messages if you just want to reply to one
line (especially with "Me, too!" or "Yes!" or such). It uses up disk
space at the receiving end rapidly, and often makes it impossible to
figure what's being agreed with!
2) NOTE that #1 above applies 1000-fold (or more!) to Digest
subscribers. Nothing (well, not much) is more frustrating than
getting a three-word reply to one point in one message included
in a 60KB+ digest...which then quotes the entire Digest, all
40 or 50 messages!
3) PLEASE change the subject line when you change the subject!
Admittedly, this makes it difficult to keep threads together (which
is why "Was:" is used) but if you are looking for the message(s) on
a given subject you remember being discussed, which was never
the "Subject:" entry...well, good luck in finding it!
3.1) KEEP in mind that "Re: <list> Digest 1,234,567" is not a
meaningful Subject entry!
4) REMEMBER that many lists (dunno about arsclist) "eat" any
attachments to posted list messages...and not all subscribers to a
given list may be interested in your attached whatever. Further, a
lot of e-mail users delete anything that comes in with an attachment
due to virus dangers. Best to send that wonderful file off-list...and
if possible precede it with a "I'm going to send you this huge file
as an attachment..." message. As well, remember that attached
files are only useful, or even comprehensible, to the recipient if
he/she/it has the relevent program...and, often, the relevant
version thereof!
5) NOT mandatory...but it's a big help if your "text name," sigblock
or both carry your e-address. Admittedly, this may render you a
bit more vulnerable to "address harvesting"...but it is very useful
if you want to send someone an off-list message, or a new message
rather than a reply message.
I concur in all of those recommendations. I would add only one which has
not come up on this list:
6) Do not crosspost a reply to the list and the author without making that
explicit in the reply. Doing so invites the original author to reply first
privately, then to reply to the list. Writing the same text twice without
reason does not induce temperance.
Mike
mrichter@xxxxxxx
http://www.mrichter.com/
-
For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
from the author of the post.