on Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 09:46:00PM +0800, David Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Tuesday 16 September 2003 20:45, Kent West wrote: > > <KMSelf posted a standard blurb about not top-posting in response to a > > thread he was otherwise not involved in.> > > > > > For clarity and to support conversational discussion style, please > > > use bottom-posting format: your reply goes below the material > > > cited. Trim your quotes appropriately and ensure your > > > attributions are accurate. > > > > > > See: > > > > > > http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/email-style.html > > > http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html > > > http://mailformat.dan.info/quoting/top-posting.html > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > Wayne Sitton wrote: > > >and as to you KMSelf, as far as I know this is an open list, and > > >your email to me on what you think should be proper email response > > >was not asked for by me. I gave an answer to a question that had > > >nothing to do with you...and as far as I know you are not a > > >moderator of this list. > > > > > >So basically...butt out > > > > Since "this is an open list", and since Karsten's part of this > > community, and since these messages are archived for the community, > > Karsten has as much right as anyone to gently steer people in the > > "ways of the list". I hope I'm not being offensive by saying this; I > > don't mean to be. > > Hello, > > In being a member of any social group, there is a requirement for a > standard of behaviour conformity.
> This is usually to ensure the end result of a commonly perceived
> productive direction.
> On the subscribe page for the Debian maillists, there is a reference
> to the format required for this environment
In fairness to Wayne, a preference for top or bottom posting isn't
indicated. Casual review of formats shows that bottom posting is the
vastly preferred format.
While I won't rehash the arguments for this, I'll call out two
specifics:
- Mixing styles is particularly annoying, and tends to result in posts
which are too tangled to respond to meaningfully, without major
edits.
- I've been known to leave lists altogether where netiquette is
utterly broken. One classic was very high volume, very low signal,
used a half dozen or more quoting formats, had few members with
mailers (or webmail programs) capable of sanely threading, quoting,
or wrapping content, and tended to consist either of epic screeds
sailing past each other, or two line comments atop hundreds of
lines, and many generations, of quoted content.
Wayne is free to use whatever quoting style, and respond to list
members, in any manner he chooses. He's also free to bear the
consequences.
Others are minded that their own return from the list will benefit
greatly by a small investment in following norms of behavior and style,
most of which have good reasons for existence.
> There are a number of personalities on this list that have been here
> for some considerable time, have put in a lot of work towards
> promoting the efficient use of the Debian system, and have politely
> requested over the years that other posters conform to the standard
> previously mentioned.
> The standard is there, not just for the purposes of social acceptance,
> but also for the efficient cataloguing of the archives. Archives which
> these people have spent a lot of time and energy in creating.
> When somebody arrives on the scene without fully realising the
> requirement for the formality, by their non-adherence their action is
> seen as personally abusive.
Thanks, David and Kent.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Defeat EU Software Patents! http://swpat.ffii.org/
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
