<p dir="ltr">I'm writing this on a 4x8 slab of plastic and glad with my finger tip. What you're proposing is ridiculously impractical. </p>
<p dir="ltr">You can't assume that everyone is still using pine or mutt. Threads are nicely laid out and comment blocks are conveniently hidden. I don't use vi to edit email anymore; I just wrote a couple sentences in the box on top and hit send. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Darcy.<br>
PS: <a href="http://five.sentenc.es">http://five.sentenc.es</a></p>
<div class="gmail_quot<blockquote class=" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Allow me to re-arrange this conversation so that (chronologically<br>
speaking, at least) it is a little more coherent:<br>
<br>
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 12:42:17PM -0400, unsolicited wrote:<br>
> Subject: Re: [kwlug-disc] trimming posts<br>
<br>
>> On 14-04-20 12:27 PM, Adam Glauser wrote:<br>
>> In case people skipped over this bit in Steve's signature, I<br>
>> thought I'd highlight it.<br>
>> ... [see signature line below]<br>
<br>
> On 14-04-20 12:35 PM, <a href="mailto:rbclemen@gmail.com">rbclemen@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br>
>> Top posting makes the perfectly reasonable assumption that<br>
>> most people in the discussion aren't new to it, and don't need<br>
>> to scroll through a dozen pages of now poorly formatted text<br>
>> they have already read to find the start of the purpose of the<br>
>> email.<br>
><br>
> Agreed. The quoted text is from a time long since passed, and<br>
> the world of e-mail lists instead of newsgroups has moved on.<br>
> Especially in a small local geographic list such as this is.<br>
<br>
That assumption is not reasonable. How can you argue that everyone<br>
has kept in mind the same details of the discussion that you<br>
have? At the very least, it's a courtesy to those with whom<br>
you're corresponding to show a continuity in the discussion<br>
points. It's also not a good idea to assume that people aren't<br>
busy doing other things between posts.<br>
<br>
As for "a dozen pages of now poorly formatted text", why do you<br>
recycle it with each message? Why not just delete it if you don't<br>
expect people to go through it?<br>
<br>
In regards to "moving on", since when has progress in time<br>
inherently resulted in improvements? I'll quote Arthur Dent:<br>
"I've gone off the idea of progess. It's overrated." The point of<br>
this discussion (and the "quoted text", i.e., the wikipedia<br>
article) is to argue that the "moving on" has been in the<br>
direction of decreased coherency, sort of like "moving on" in the<br>
fast food industry over the past few decades has resulted in a<br>
massive increase in garbage.<br>
<br>
> Granted, digesting makes the problem worse, which is why I have<br>
> long since abandoned it on most any list I participate in.<br>
<br>
The digest format magnifies the problem, especially when people<br>
include all of the digest in their replies. That's sheer<br>
laziness. But it's also laziness to include parts of the message<br>
you have no intention of referring to.<br>
<br>
> Paul's 40k limit for the purposes of keeping posts small is specious<br>
> - I can't recall the last time I saw a post get anywhere near it. It<br>
> does, however, keep most attachments away, for which I am very<br>
> grateful.<br>
<br>
The point of his post was not the 40k but the criticism that<br>
people are not trimming their posts.<br>
<br>
One of the first Unix principles I was taught: Silence is golden.<br>
A program should not return messages (to stderr, i.e., the<br>
console) if it has accomplished what you expected. Command syntax<br>
is terse, as is typical Unix markup. There were physical reasons<br>
for this, of course, which no longer hold. But the elegance of it<br>
is the reduction of noise on the system, fewer bytes to store and<br>
clean up, concise input (despite the fact that the programmers<br>
I knew were exceptionnally good typists). Large, cheap storage<br>
systems and extremely fast CPUs don't change the signal to noise<br>
ratio.<br>
<br>
-- Steve<br>
<br>
--<br>
Steve Izma<br>
-<br>
Home: 35 Locust St., Kitchener N2H 1W6 p:<a href="tel:519-745-1313" value="+15197451313">519-745-1313</a><br>
Work: Wilfrid Laurier University Press p:<a href="tel:519-884-0710%20ext.%206125" value="+15198840710">519-884-0710 ext. 6125</a><br>
E-mail: <a href="mailto:sizma@golden.net">sizma@golden.net</a> or <a href="mailto:steve@press.wlu.ca">steve@press.wlu.ca</a><br>
<br>
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.<br>
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?<br>
A: Top-posting.<br>
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?<br>
<<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
kwlug-disc mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:kwlug-disc@kwlug.org">kwlug-disc@kwlug.org</a><br>
<a href="http://kwlug.org/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org" target="_blank">http://kwlug.org/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org</a><br>
</div>