[arch-general] Top Posting Revisited

[Raghavendra D Prabhu]

Hi,

* On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:13:32AM +0100, Nicolas Sebrecht <nsebrecht at piing.fr> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>The 16/12/11, Raghavendra D Prabhu wrote:
>
>> I am all for bottom posting if it helps the reader of my mail.
>> But,

>>     * For instance, I use t-prot to fold the reply, so that I don't have
>>       keep scrolling to read the reply I already know (because mails are
>>       threaded), but I may be outside or using something which doesn't
>>       fold as well as this, in those circumstances top posting helps.
>
>Quoting the whole mail like you did is as crappy as top-posting. This is
>exactly what makes everybody scroll.

So what do you think fits better -- inline replies as you did ? I use
inline replies too given the circumstances. However, to avoid scrolling
you can try using t-prot for folding. While replying, vim also folds my
messages. 

In mutt, you cannot limit the quote context I guess and I
don't want to limit the context by manually deleting the lines; however
I would also like to add as to how do you decide how much context to
retain in a non-inline reply -- too less will mean no context at all and
too much may mean some readers complain. 
Since you seem to be so miffed by my whole mail quote, how would you
feel in a mail thread with  5-10 previous mail contexts (even if they
are small) ? 

>
>>     * Regarding the context that people seem to be so enthusiastically ebullient about
>>       (even on the links you posted), tell me how much of context do you
>>       see in mails of today ? 1 ? 2 ? I followed this whole thread and I
>>       don't see more than that. Do you know why ?
>
>Art of quoting is *not* a matter of context level. It's about direct
>relevance of your own answer.

>
>> I don't think this top or bottom posting matters to me for I use a sane
>> client.
>
>But you keep whole-quoting which is silly. No MUA can help for that.

Of course you can. See my answer above/bottom on how to configure. I
imagine you or someone alike scrolling the whole mail to answer, no
wonder you are so unhappy about the 'whole' posting thing.

>
>>         But what matters to me most is a post and bunch of morons (not
>> your fault) replying stating people to be forcefully unsubscribed and/or
>> rebuked if they top post.
>
>People who don't know how to work with mails need education. Once done,
>if they don't want to conform, it's pretty normal to ban them.

Go ahead, I can't argue any further, spread your education; whatever
floats your boat.

>
>> I understand that people should bottom post but to
>> enforce it won't be that easy; though you can write script to process
>> your incoming mails and make all bottom posted, shouldnt be hard with
>> procmail (given that all use markers when replying).
>
>This is the worst. Banning means we are free to not accept people who
>decided to not conform to the netiquette. Changing answers by a bot
>means there is no more respect for human choices.

Again, if you think netiquette conceived by you/few is the final word
carved over iron, then I have no issues. Also, when you state human
choice -- I don't want to expand this further -- it means choices of
others as well.

>
>What your bot would have done with the "hi" I wrote on the top of my
>answer?
>What solution will you spread when some people will be tied to hear
>words like "suck", "fuck" and so?

Bot ? Since when is procmail a bot ? anyways, you can do something about
it (I have tons like that), but all that matters whether you want to or
not. For instance, while replying I make vim place cursor at the bottom
of quoted reply to ease in replying and also make vim fold replies.


To conclude, it is not the theme of discussion with which I have an
issue but the tone. Something similar I have seen is ESR page being
quoted everywhere without any prior deliberation.

Regards,
Raghavendra
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20111219/886884ec/attachment.asc>