2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-groups at riseup.net
Fri Apr 29 12:30:53 CEST 2016
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thursday 28 April 2016 at 10:02:30 AM, in
<mid:CAO4LoOy26+qQfL8Bi_tNgp4jCbQitfgSL_Erz==ZjOffazJvCQ at mail.gmail.com>,
Paolo Bolzoni wrote:
> When you follow an email thyread you do not read
> everything, you just
> read the new email and it makes little difference if
> it is in the top.
Sometimes it makes a great deal of difference. Emails on mailing lists
often arrive out of sequence, and some mailing list members may
auto-delete messages from certain other members. The person reading
your posting may not have seen the message that is being answered.
Even if they have seen it, it may not be clear to which part of the
message a top-posted comment refers. Bottom-posting is just as bad in
> However, I agree there is not need to keep clutter
> in the bottom of emails.
Judicious quoting and inline quoting automatically precludes this.
> So while I still don't see the big deal with
For a list or organisation where top-posting is the norm, top-posting
works despite its inefficiency. In fact, in such situations any other
way of replying is liable to confuse.
Where it is not the norm, it is confusing. It is a bit like driving on
the wrong side of the road: either side is fine, as long as people do
not try to mix them in the same location.
> I agree that
> is much better (A) to trim and answers to single
> points or (B) simply
> make a clean email.
Please not (B), or it will appear as a new thread. (Unless you meant
reply to the previous message without quoting from it.)
MFPA <mailto:2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-groups at riseup.net>
Keep them dry and don't feed them after midnight
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Gnupg-users