nanog mailing list archives
Re: plaintext email?
From: James R Cutler <james.cutler () consultant com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:42:30 -0500
Warning —top posting also with interspersed comments. 👍🏻 <— that’s a thumbs up
On Jan 15, 2019, at 1:36 PM, bzs () theworld com wrote: Re: Top Posting To me it depends on whether there's any chance the reader won't know what precisely you're responding to in which case in-line is warranted. I don't have any quoted text in this msg (is that top posting?), is anyone lost? THE REAL REASON for my responding at all is because there are people who lurk and sometimes manage lists who will react angrily, often in private email (cowards! :-) ), to a top-post as if you violated some inarguable rule and you maybe should be banned or at the very least are very rude, similar in tone to if you'd spammed the list or whatever.
I am appalled at the nastiness regarding posting prejudices. "But, but, if your cognitive processes do not match mine, you are an idiot.” “Why should I love my neighbor as myself? I am so much better"
I just thought I'd point out it's just a formatting opinion, a judgement call by whoever is responding, and nothing more, it's not some rule everyone accepts so lose the self-righteous tone. If anything I suspect it might have to do with the MUA one uses. Maybe, at the very least, accept that the person who top-posted is looking at a very different layout than you are, one where that top-post looks just fine?
And the viewer/replier may have significantly different cognitive skills.
I use Emacs/VM for email. It's quite good at, for example, splitting the screen so I can look ahead (or behind) in the message if I've lost track of some context, or even opening multiple related msgs (even if already filed) simultaneously to go back and review what's been said already, or forward even to see if one is about to say something which has already been adequately addressed. It's probably quite a bit different than the one-way upside-down (date-wise) scrolling on some vendor-supplied smartphone app. I've used them when I've had nothing else and I haven't a clue how one can do much else than essentially "more" thru the latest, silo'd, 10^9 spams interspersed with the occasional bit of ham 20 lines at a time so I guess I can understand why some become desperate and angry to get others to format their email for their convenience. Maybe your problem isn't the top-posting but your lousy MUA?
Or, perhaps, attitude?
-- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs () TheWorld com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
James R. Cutler James.cutler () consultant com GPG keys: hkps://hkps.pool.sks-keyservers.net
Current thread:
- Top Posting Was: Re: plaintext email?, (continued)
- Top Posting Was: Re: plaintext email? James R Cutler (Jan 15)
- Re: Top Posting Was: Re: plaintext email? Tom Beecher (Jan 15)
- Re: Top Posting Was: Re: plaintext email? Brian Kantor (Jan 15)
- Re: Top Posting Was: Re: plaintext email? Stephen Satchell (Jan 15)
- Re: Top Posting Was: Re: plaintext email? John Levine (Jan 15)
- Re: Top Posting Was: Re: plaintext email? James R Cutler (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? Tei (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? Stephen Satchell (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? bzs (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? William Herrin (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? James R Cutler (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? bzs (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? Grant Taylor via NANOG (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? Grant Taylor via NANOG (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? Brian J. Murrell (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? Bryan Fields (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? cosmo (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? Aled Morris via NANOG (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? Christopher Morrow (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? Bryan Fields (Jan 15)
- Re: plaintext email? bzs (Jan 15)