[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Gmail and quotes
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Gmail and quotes |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:22:47 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
Helge Kruse <address@hidden> writes:
>> This interface "improvement" also effectively enforces top-posting: it takes
>> extra effort to post replies in the middle of quotes (like a conversation)
>> and most people don't care.
>
> I am in the "e-mail world" for some decades. It was always a good
> style to write the answer on top of all other text and to not delete
> anything that has written before.
In a mailing list? No. Never. Absolutely not. Please look up any
kind of "netiquette" you can find on the net.
The _only_ situation where top-posting makes _any_ kind of sense is when
communicating with the likes of technical support.
> This makes it easy to save one late copy of the e-mail conversation
> and more important to invite more people to the conversation by
> extending the CC list.
If you quote _properly_, namely by _only_ leaving the material _in_
_place_ that is _relevant_ for the context of the _current_ discussion,
inviting anybody in is possible at any point of time.
Yes, it is bad style to post with crucial context missing. But no, not
every part of a threads history is crucial context. Not even of the
last mail.
> The Gmail interface support this usable behavior of the user with this
> improvement.
Ahhahhahahahhahahahahahahahah!!! It is obvious to anybody with a brain
that storing and sending the same message content _again_ for every
single mail is ludicrous and leads to quadratic network and storage
capacity requirements, only limited by today's people's inability to
lead an extended conversation. When I write a book, I don't feel
compelled to append all previous chapters in reverse order at the end of
each chapter.
> Mailing lists use the e-mail transport mechanism to build a community.
> Here you have invited everybody who has subscribed to the list.
Cc is also possible when using a mailing list, and a number of LilyPond
mailing lists are open for non-subscribers as well. So that's not an
absolute criterion.
> We just use the medium to have something like a forum without using a
> dedicated tool. The pros and cons of e.g. Stackoverflow have been
> discussed before. The technical mean what would fit best would have
> been the usenet, but that's dead.
I am actually reading this list via nntp (news.gmane.org).
> Finally we use e-mail in a way different from the mainstream.
No, we don't. None of my friends top-posts.
> So we will have to live with improvements that doesn't fit with our
> requirements.
An "improvement" that _does_ _not_ _scale_ is no improvement.
--
David Kastrup
- Gmail and quotes, James Harkins, 2013/11/13
- Re: Gmail and quotes, Helge Kruse, 2013/11/14
- Message not available
- Re: Gmail and quotes,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: Gmail and quotes, SoundsFromSound, 2013/11/14
- Re: Gmail and quotes, David Kastrup, 2013/11/14
- Re: Gmail and quotes, Janek Warchoł, 2013/11/14
- Re: Gmail and quotes, David Kastrup, 2013/11/14
- Re: Gmail and quotes, Janek Warchoł, 2013/11/14
- Re: Gmail and quotes, SoundsFromSound, 2013/11/14
- Re: Gmail and quotes, Hilary Snaden, 2013/11/14
- Re: Gmail and quotes, David Kastrup, 2013/11/14
- Re: Gmail and quotes, Helge Kruse, 2013/11/14
- Re: Gmail and quotes, David Kastrup, 2013/11/14