On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Marcel Korpel
wrote:
> Please, people, it's only two months ago that this was posted:
> https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2014-August/036950.html
>
> Please, stop top-posting, the netflix discussion is hard to follow with
> several people top-post
It would appear that on Dec 19, Raghavendra D Prabhu did say:
> In mutt, you cannot limit the quote context I guess and I
> don't want to limit the context by manually deleting the lines
{snip}
> For instance, while replying I make vim place cursor at the bottom
> of quoted reply to ease in rep
On 16-12-11 12:24, Jude DaShiell wrote:
[ bottom posting, nettiquette ]
The creators of the original email protocol could have if they chose put
together an rfc on top posting and writers of email programs could have
written software in such a way that top posting became impossible. None
of tha
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:07:59 +0100
Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> The 19/12/11, Ralf Madorf wrote:
>
> > PS: I mean, you should ban them using your MUAs filters, but a list
> > shouldn't do.
>
> Whatever the filtering purpose is about, any personal filter fails at
> the job because answers of others
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 15:56:44 +0530
Raghavendra D Prabhu wrote:
> Bot ? Since when is procmail a bot ?
meaning is what matters and anyway I'd say it is, procmail is
programmed to do what it does aka a robot.
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:13:32 +0100
Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> What solution will you spread when some people will be tied to hear
> words like "suck", "fuck" and so?
Change the words to things like, flowery and angel.
Could be hilarious.
"Shut up you mother angel your so flowery lovely"
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Raghavendra D Prabhu
wrote:
> 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.
This whole discussion has nothing to do with scrolling, most mail
c
On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 11:43 +0100, Ralf Madorf wrote:
> > >What solution will you spread when some people will be tied to hear
> > >words like "suck", "fuck" and so?
>
> Spencer Tracy in "Inherit the Wind" said (I only know the quote in
> German, so I might badly translate it): "We should use all
> >What solution will you spread when some people will be tied to hear
> >words like "suck", "fuck" and so?
Spencer Tracy in "Inherit the Wind" said (I only know the quote in
German, so I might badly translate it): "We should use all words that
are in layman's terms, since we don't have much of t
Hi,
* On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:13:32AM +0100, Nicolas Sebrecht
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
* On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 07:47:03AM +0530, gt wrote:
Hello folks, i'll probably get flamed for reviving a very controversial,
yet consistently brought up topic.
I have seen a similar thread last year, and every other day, someone
points out to someone that top posting is bad.
I was off the li
On Friday 16 Dec 2011 15:37:01 Ralf Madorf wrote:
> The Internet anonymity is grotesque, it's like talking to a chatbot like
> ELIZA (Weizenbaum is one of my idols :). Did you note that most Linux users
> use their real names :)?
>
> This is more important for me than thinking about top and bottom
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 03:17, gt wrote:
> Hello folks, i'll probably get flamed for reviving a very controversial,
> yet consistently brought up topic.
>
> I have seen a similar thread last year, and every other day, someone
> points out to someone that top posting is bad.
>
> I was off the list
On 2011-12-16 at 11:16 +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> I agree.
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> > (...)
> >
> > My favourite option is to have someone with admin access to
> > the list (e.g. me...) just unsubscribe anyone who top posts.
Agreeing to unsubscribing top poste
Am 16.12.2011 04:47, schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
> Yeah lets all just spam fuck gmail devs because they won't add a automatic
> bottom posting feature.
>
> Seriously...
>
> +++
>
> Since I'm uncertain how to handle incoming emails in the future I still use
> my providers M$ thingy. I prefer bottom po
Am 16.12.2011 15:41, schrieb Gaetan Bisson:
> [2011-12-16 14:51:43 +0100] G. Schlisio:
>> for me, top posting seemed to save scrolling time, and everything
>> included after the reply i regarded as a reference for remembering
>> discussion on the topic.
> Did you see the movie "Memento"?
>
>> man,
[2011-12-16 14:51:43 +0100] G. Schlisio:
> for me, top posting seemed to save scrolling time, and everything
> included after the reply i regarded as a reference for remembering
> discussion on the topic.
Did you see the movie "Memento"?
> man, i cant think of something more stupid…
Well, do you
> On 12/16/2011 04:59, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> > i mean, people don't act the same way with their own family vs.
> > the internet allows for obscene levels of
> > anonymity that simply *cannot* exist in traditional/direct
> > communication
We are humans so it's not bad if we misbehave, act li
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 14:51 +0100, G. Schlisio wrote:
>
> Am 16.12.2011 11:20, schrieb Allan McRae:
> > On 16/12/11 12:17, gt wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> > My favourite option is to have someone with admin access to the list
> > (e.g. me...) just unsubscribe anyone who top posts.
> >
> > Allan
> >
> r
Am 16.12.2011 11:20, schrieb Allan McRae:
On 16/12/11 12:17, gt wrote:
I have seen a similar thread last year, and every other day, someone
points out to someone that top posting is bad.
I was off the list for a while, and now when i came back, the story is
still the same.
And your email has
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 11:33 +0200, Rogutės Sparnuotos wrote:
> [snip]
> I have tried reading some of your messages in the last days, but it was
> too difficult to understand who you are talking with, what you are
> replying to and what do multiple lines of "+++" mean. Thought I'd simply
> ignore th
On 12/16/2011 04:59, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense
wrote:
On 12/16/2011 02:03, Jeffrey Lynn Parke Jr. wrote:
I don't really think that people put any conscious thought into if they
should top or bottom post. A majority of mail clients and
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: arch-general-boun...@archlinux.org on behalf of Calvin Morrison
> Sent: Fri 12/16/2011 04:21
> To: General Discussion about Arch Linux
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Top Posting Revisited
>
> On 1
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 08:20:42PM +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
> And your email has changed the world and we will not see a repeat of
> this in the future. Hooray!
>
>
> My favourite option is to have someone with admin access to the list
> (e.g. me...) just unsubscribe anyone who top posts.
>
I
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 16/12/11 12:17, gt wrote:
[...]
> My favourite option is to have someone with admin access to the list
> (e.g. me...) just unsubscribe anyone who top posts.
Power corrupts, absolute power ... is even more fun :D
Rafa
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 05:19:59 +0100
"Ralf Mardorf" wrote:
> I don't really think that people put any conscious thought into if they
> should top or bottom post.
That is the real issue and banning top-posting solves most problems but
can actually cost a reader time in some cases.
Do unto others a
I agree.
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 16/12/11 12:17, gt wrote:
>> I have seen a similar thread last year, and every other day, someone
>> points out to someone that top posting is bad.
>>
>> I was off the list for a while, and now when i came back, the story is
>> st
On 16/12/11 12:17, gt wrote:
> I have seen a similar thread last year, and every other day, someone
> points out to someone that top posting is bad.
>
> I was off the list for a while, and now when i came back, the story is
> still the same.
And your email has changed the world and we will not se
On 16/12/2011, at 06:19, Rafa Griman wrote:
>
> There are other reasons I've seen:
> - people that use "smart" phones have a limited screen size and
> it's "easier" to top post.
> - from a behavioural point of view, people follow these steps:
> 1.- read the whole mail
>
Ralf Mardorf (2011-12-16 04:47):
> -Original Message-
> From: arch-general-boun...@archlinux.org on behalf of Calvin Morrison
> Sent: Fri 12/16/2011 04:21
> To: General Discussion about Arch Linux
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Top Posting Revisited
Your "M$ thingy
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: arch-general-boun...@archlinux.org on behalf of Jeffrey Lynn Parke Jr.
> Sent: Fri 12/16/2011 05:03
>
> I don't really think that people put any conscious thought into if they
> should top or bottom post. A m
HI :)
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 4:47 AM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: arch-general-boun...@archlinux.org on behalf of Calvin Morrison
> Sent: Fri 12/16/2011 04:21
> To: General Discussion about Arch Linux
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Top Posting Revisite
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Rodrigo Amorim Bahiense
wrote:
> On 12/16/2011 02:03, Jeffrey Lynn Parke Jr. wrote:
>>
>> I don't really think that people put any conscious thought into if they
>> should top or bottom post. A majority of mail clients and
>> the aforementioned Gmail default to to
On 12/16/2011 02:03, Jeffrey Lynn Parke Jr. wrote:
I don't really think that people put any conscious thought into if they
should top or bottom post. A majority of mail clients and
the aforementioned Gmail default to top posting. What I would like to know
is why is this the common practice. Obvio
[2011-12-16 04:47:14 +0100] Ralf Mardorf:
> Do we really need rules and rules and rules?
We don't. But it's not just about you writing messages the way you want:
it's about other people being able to read them conveniently, especially
you expect them to consider the points you are making or questi
When in a private correspondence, regardless of the number of
participants, the context is probably known and thus there is no need
to read previous replies. I would reply like this, because I only care
about what you and I are talking about at this point of time - there
is no need for any referenc
-Original Message-
From: arch-general-boun...@archlinux.org on behalf of Jeffrey Lynn Parke Jr.
Sent: Fri 12/16/2011 05:03
I don't really think that people put any conscious thought into if they
should top or bottom post. A majority of mail clients and
the aforementioned Gmail default to t
I don't really think that people put any conscious thought into if they
should top or bottom post. A majority of mail clients and
the aforementioned Gmail default to top posting. What I would like to know
is why is this the common practice. Obviously, people on forums and mailing
lists like everyth
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Auguste Pop wrote:
> i'm not sure how the script works. i went to the link you gave and hit
> the install button. i closed all chromium instances and opened the
> browser again. still, bottom posting is not automatic.
Might be a Chromium issue. I'm on Firefox v3.
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Alex Liu wrote:
> However, there exists a bottom posting script for Greasemonkey if you
> want to check that out.
> http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/35866
> An according lab feature has been suggested some time ago in the Gmail
> group, but as of no there has b
-Original Message-
From: arch-general-boun...@archlinux.org on behalf of Calvin Morrison
Sent: Fri 12/16/2011 04:21
To: General Discussion about Arch Linux
Subject: Re: [arch-general] Top Posting Revisited
On 15 December 2011 22:07, Sander Jansen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 8
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Kazuo Teramoto wrote:
> Part of the whole 'bottom posting' thing is about *reading* and
> *thinking* about the reply and not *automatic* replying to a message.
This.
I think it's not about if the reply is above or below whatever you
quote but because a full quot
On Dec 16, 2011 9:06 AM, "Kazuo Teramoto" wrote:
>
> On 2011-12-16T01:21:22, Calvin Morrison wrote:
> >Yeah lets all just spam fuck gmail devs because they won't add a
automatic
> >bottom posting feature.
> >
>
> I don't think this is a solution.
>
> Part of the whole 'bottom posting' thing is abo
On 2011-12-16T01:21:22, Calvin Morrison wrote:
>Yeah lets all just spam fuck gmail devs because they won't add a automatic
>bottom posting feature.
>
I don't think this is a solution.
Part of the whole 'bottom posting' thing is about *reading* and
*thinking* about the reply and not *automatic* re
On 15 December 2011 22:07, Sander Jansen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 8:17 PM, gt wrote:
> > Hello folks, i'll probably get flamed for reviving a very controversial,
> > yet consistently brought up topic.
> >
> > I have seen a similar thread last year, and every other day, someone
> > points
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 8:17 PM, gt wrote:
> Hello folks, i'll probably get flamed for reviving a very controversial,
> yet consistently brought up topic.
>
> I have seen a similar thread last year, and every other day, someone
> points out to someone that top posting is bad.
>
> I was off the lis
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:17 AM, gt wrote:
> Hello folks, i'll probably get flamed for reviving a very controversial,
> yet consistently brought up topic.
I think it is very pertinent. I'll start a similar post in archlinux-br.
> I suggest all of the top-posting haters should including one of t
On 15 December 2011 21:17, gt wrote:
> Hello folks, i'll probably get flamed for reviving a very controversial,
> yet consistently brought up topic.
>
> I have seen a similar thread last year, and every other day, someone
> points out to someone that top posting is bad.
>
> I was off the list for
El 06/03/2010 13:06, Nilesh Govindarajan escribió:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Michishige Kaitowrote:
El 06/03/2010 11:53, Nilesh Govindarajan escribió:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Chris Hoeppner
wrote:
On 06/03/10 11:23, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:13
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 18:36 +0530, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Michishige Kaito
> wrote:
> > You can disable the "copy to sent" in Thunderbird, which would probably
> > solve the problem you describe about "double traffic". I use the spanish
> > version of TB, so t
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Michishige Kaito wrote:
> El 06/03/2010 11:53, Nilesh Govindarajan escribió:
>
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Chris Hoeppner> >wrote:
>>
>> On 06/03/10 11:23, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Chris Hoeppner>>>
> wrote:
>>>
El 06/03/2010 11:53, Nilesh Govindarajan escribió:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Chris Hoeppnerwrote:
On 06/03/10 11:23, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Chris Hoeppner
wrote:
On 06/03/10 10:30, Xavier Chantry wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Daniel
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Chris Hoeppner wrote:
> On 06/03/10 11:23, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Chris Hoeppner> >wrote:
>>
>> On 06/03/10 10:30, Xavier Chantry wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)
wrote:
On 06/03/10 11:23, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Chris Hoeppnerwrote:
On 06/03/10 10:30, Xavier Chantry wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)
wrote:
I use mutt with a nifty little binding that automagically jumps to the
last
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Chris Hoeppner wrote:
> On 06/03/10 10:30, Xavier Chantry wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I use mutt with a nifty little binding that automagically jumps to the
>>> last
>>> blank line in the file wh
On 06/03/10 10:30, Xavier Chantry wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)
wrote:
I use mutt with a nifty little binding that automagically jumps to the last
blank line in the file when it opens a message for reply :P
--
Well with mutt you can use a decent tex
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)
wrote:
>
> I use mutt with a nifty little binding that automagically jumps to the last
> blank line in the file when it opens a message for reply :P
> --
>
Well with mutt you can use a decent text editor which will allow you
do that
On 03/06/10 at 11:34am, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 7:53 AM, gt wrote:
>
> > People using gmail's web interface are not likely to notice any problem
> > with
> > top or bottom posting, since gmail collapses the quoted text. but when we
> > use a mail client, then we see th
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 7:53 AM, gt wrote:
> People using gmail's web interface are not likely to notice any problem
> with
> top or bottom posting, since gmail collapses the quoted text. but when we
> use a mail client, then we see the difference.
>
> Source: Personal experience. After reading a
People using gmail's web interface are not likely to notice any problem with
top or bottom posting, since gmail collapses the quoted text. but when we
use a mail client, then we see the difference.
Source: Personal experience. After reading a lot about posting style on this
mailing list, i decided
Am 05.03.2010 18:28, schrieb Giovanni Scafora:
> 2010/3/4, Juan Diego :
>> Hello listmates,
>>
>> is there any special reason of why top-posting is a bad thing?
>
> Is not the RFC1855 [1] a special reason for you?
> See 3.1.1 General Guidelines for mailing lists and NetNews
>
> [1] http://tools.
2010/3/4, Juan Diego :
> Hello listmates,
>
> is there any special reason of why top-posting is a bad thing?
Is not the RFC1855 [1] a special reason for you?
See 3.1.1 General Guidelines for mailing lists and NetNews
[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
--
Arch Linux Developer
http://www.ar
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>
> Top posting doesn't solve this, unless you're implying top posting
> with no previous messages trimmed. If this is what you're implying you
> need to compare apples-to-apples and assume the bottom-posted emails
> will have no previous messa
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Denis Kobozev wrote:
> Bottom posting shows its downside only when you recently joined a
> mailing list, for example - you start receiving emails from threads
> that have been going for a long time and you have no idea what people
> are discussing. But if you're rea
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:57 AM, Denis Kobozev wrote:
>
> Bottom posting shows its downside only when you recently joined a
> mailing list, for example - you start receiving emails from threads
> that have been going for a long time and you have no idea what people
> are discussing. But if you're
The only advantage of top posting I can think of is that it enables
you to forward the entire chain of emails to a new person with one
click. You could, of course, bottom post and keep the entire chain in
each email, but it's probably even worse than top posting, since you
would have to scroll thro
Aaron Griffin wrote:
However, this is a mailing list. Not everyone is aware of the "state"
of the list at any given time. It's best to bottom post and only
reference relevant material so that even someone coming upon the 15th
email in a chain is able to read just that email and understand it for
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:36 AM, Patrick Burroughs
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 23:31, Juan Diego wrote:
>> Hello listmates,
>>
>> is there any special reason of why top-posting is a bad thing?
>
> To be clichéd...
>
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 17:36:13 +0900
Juan Diego wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)
> wrote:
> > On 03/03/10 at 11:36pm, Patrick Burroughs wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 23:31, Juan Diego
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hello listmates,
> >> >
> >> > is there any special
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)
wrote:
> On 03/03/10 at 11:36pm, Patrick Burroughs wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 23:31, Juan Diego wrote:
>> > Hello listmates,
>> >
>> > is there any special reason of why top-posting is a bad thing?
>>
>> To be clichéd...
>>
>> A
On 03/03/10 at 11:36pm, Patrick Burroughs wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 23:31, Juan Diego wrote:
> > Hello listmates,
> >
> > is there any special reason of why top-posting is a bad thing?
>
> To be clichéd...
>
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why i
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 23:31, Juan Diego wrote:
> Hello listmates,
>
> is there any special reason of why top-posting is a bad thing?
To be clichéd...
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most
On Tuesday 20 May 2008 23:55:38 Mordechai Peller wrote:
> Like with firing a gun, it depends on the context.
Yeah, well, while reading your email:
"Why yes, I just so happened to be holding the gun and pulling the
trigger when it went off. But honestly, it was the gun's fault. If the
manufact
Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
It is obvious that you are doing something wrong whenever you shot a gun but
not when you use a mail client and you top-post. Of course it is not the
same "wrong" but my point was about the *knowledge*.
Like with firing a gun, it depends on the context. Just as I cou
On Tuesday 20 May 2008 10:33:16 eliott wrote:
> How do I shot email?
Is this a joke or what?
It is obvious that you are doing something wrong whenever you shot a gun but
not when you use a mail client and you top-post. Of course it is not the
same "wrong" but my point was about the *knowledge*
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 8:52 AM, jason maxwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 4:43 AM, RedShift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I guess you don't like HTML email as well :-(
>
> Neither did Hitler's Nazi regime.
>
Ok, ok, you win this round. But it was a willful invocation o
> On 5/20/08, Marc Deop i Argemà <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tuesday 20 May 2008 03:08:14 Mordechai Peller wrote:
>> > "Why yes, I just so happened to be holding the gun and pulling the
>> trigger when it went off. But honestly, it was the gun's fault. If
>> the manufacture hadn't designed
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 4:43 AM, RedShift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess you *don't* like HTML email as well :-(
>
Neither did Hitler's Nazi regime.
I guess you don't like HTML email as well
:-(
Xavier wrote:
http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
What about using a consistent style, at least for one given ML?
arch-general is really painful to read sometimes.
Thanks!
I guess you /don't/ like HTML email as well :-(
Xavier wrote:
http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
What about using a consistent style, at least for one given ML?
arch-general is really painful to read sometimes.
Thanks!
On 5/20/08, Marc Deop i Argemí <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 May 2008 03:08:14 Mordechai Peller wrote:
> > "Why yes, I just so happened to be holding the gun and pulling the
> > trigger when it went off. But honestly, it was the gun's fault. If the
> > manufacture hadn't designed th
On Tuesday 20 May 2008 03:08:14 Mordechai Peller wrote:
> "Why yes, I just so happened to be holding the gun and pulling the
> trigger when it went off. But honestly, it was the gun's fault. If the
> manufacture hadn't designed the gun to fire the bullet, none of this
> would ever have happened."
Aaron Griffin wrote:
I stopped paying attention days ago. *mark-as-read*. This is a
technical list, thus inline or bottom posting is preferred. It's a
fact. There doesn't even need to be a discussion.
It wasn't my intention to start a discussion, I didn't want that thread
to grow that big.
I
I thought this whole thread was tongue in cheek (read: A giant
purposeful joke).
I missed the first serveral emails in this thread, and didn't even
realize people were actually being serious until i (just now) read the
replies after my original email.
Then I laughed.
On 5/19/08, Aaron Griffin <[EM
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As has been stated, this has already gotten too involved, but one
I stopped paying attention days ago. *mark-as-read*. This is a
technical list, thus inline or bottom posting is preferred. It's a
fact. There doesn't even need to b
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 04:08:14AM +0300, Mordechai Peller wrote:
> Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
> >We might argue if it's a mail client's fault or user's
> "Why yes, I just so happened to be holding the gun and pulling the trigger
> when
> it went off. But honestly, it was the gun's fault. If the m
Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
We might argue if it's a mail client's fault or user's
"Why yes, I just so happened to be holding the gun and pulling the
trigger when it went off. But honestly, it was the gun's fault. If the
manufacture hadn't designed the gun to fire the bullet, none of this
would
David Rosenstrauch wrote:
And similarly, I find bottom posting a bit annoying, as I'm often
forced to scroll down to read what the most recent commenter wrote.
(Though, obviously, that's really an outgrowth of bottom-posters
violating the "trimming" rule, rather than a problem with
bottom-pos
On Thursday 15 May 2008 21:21:21 Xavier wrote:
> http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
>
> What about using a consistent style, at least for one given ML?
> arch-general is really painful to read sometimes.
>
> Thanks!
Well, as far as my research has lead me to, the answer is here: RFC 1
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And then theres also html emails. I wonder if there is easy way to not
> accept non plain text emails. I know some lists have that feature.
HTML emails are an abomination. I think mailman lets me block them. I
can fin
See?
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 08:57:44PM +, Jon Kristian Nilsen wrote:
> >My point being, and I see your point, but there will be
> >More people coming to this list who doesn't know about that rule, and
>
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 08:57:44PM +, Jon Kristian Nilsen wrote:
>My point being, and I see your point, but there will be
>More people coming to this list who doesn't know about that rule, and
>forcing this upon users would imho be a painfull experience.
>Mailclients do this in
My point being, and I see your point, but there will be
More people coming to this list who doesn't know about that rule, and
forcing this upon users would imho be a painfull experience.
Mailclients do this in different ways, and I don't think all old/new users
will be taking it to their attention.
On Monday 19 May 2008 22:30:12 Xavier wrote:
> If you follow the rule, then you should to same here on this ML.
> If you don't, you die.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22died+in+a+top+posting+accident%22
mhm
--
best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Arvid Ephraim Picciani
Jon Kristian Nilsen wrote:
I blame email clients, not the poster.
I blame both. What's your point?
If you had to use a british car in France, on which side of the road
would you drive?
If you follow the rule, then you should to same here on this ML.
If you don't, you die.
I blame email clients, not the poster.
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 7:57 PM, jason maxwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [snip]
>> Personally I don't really care that much which way people post, but as
>> there's a good number of very vocal "bottom posting police" :-) types in the
>> FOSS community tha
>
> [snip]
> Personally I don't really care that much which way people post, but as
> there's a good number of very vocal "bottom posting police" :-) types in the
> FOSS community that often raise a ruckus when you top post, I generally just
> try to conform and bottom post in the interests of keep
Jon B wrote:
I'll be the weird one and admit that I find
top-postings to be easier to read. But just because I
like all of you, I'll type way down here. :)
-jb
You're not the only weird one. To me, the most recent comments are
what's most important, and if I'm interested in the background t
I tend to post all over the place.
On 5/19/08, Callan Barrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> THIS THREAD IS HILARIOUS!
I agree.
THIS THREAD IS HILARIOUS!
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 2:46 PM, Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 07:57:03AM +0200, Xavier wrote:
>> Jon B wrote:
>
>
>> ...some people top posting even in the same thread) made it harder to
>> read.
>>
>> That said, we indeed have to pick one..
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
