Re: [luv-talk] ISP alters attachments
!< Firstly the correct way to quote text is to prepend each line with "> ". Oh for the love of fuck let it go. You are not spending cycles on education here, this is the type of (ultimately bullying) behaviour that has ruined our culture. How noble the heart that must kick a flea. My last words as president of Linux Users of Victoria were - "Be Excellent to Each Other." This is why. Do better, try harder. Further correspondence will not be entered into. ALC
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 12:30:15 achalmers@westnet.com.au wrote:
You are not spending cycles on education here, this is the type of (ultimately bullying) behaviour that has ruined our culture.
The purpose of a list is for communication. When points are discussed clear communication requires referencing previous messages. If everyone quotes messages with "> " then you can have several levels of quoted text and it will still be readable. I am not aware of any other way of quoting that allows multiple levels of quoting that are clearly readable, quoting the entire previous message doesn't work as the reader would have to read all previous messages and try to figure out which section was referenced. For any form of communication there will be a variety of social norms which make things easier for everyone. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
Russell Coker wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 12:30:15 achalmers@westnet.com.au wrote:
You are not spending cycles on education here, this is the type of (ultimately bullying) behaviour that has ruined our culture.
The purpose of a list is for communication.
When points are discussed clear communication requires referencing previous messages. If everyone quotes messages with "> " then you can have several levels of quoted text and it will still be readable.
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1849.txt §4.3.2 This SHOULD be done by prefacing each quoted line (even if it is empty) with the character ">". This will result in multiple levels of ">" when quoted context itself contains quoted context. FWIW, I found the post Russell complained about so unreadable that I skipped it entirely. I approve of explaining established conventions; it's entirely appropriate.
I agree. So often established conventions are ignored and let go, then it becomes a mess and people say "let it go". All of a sudden people are posting with no grammar whatsoever and when they're corrected, people say "let it go". To quote an earlier poster, "for the love of f**k", please have some rules, at least regarding posting on the 'net. On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Trent W. Buck <trentbuck@gmail.com> wrote:
Russell Coker wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 12:30:15 achalmers@westnet.com.au wrote:
You are not spending cycles on education here, this is the type of (ultimately bullying) behaviour that has ruined our culture.
The purpose of a list is for communication.
When points are discussed clear communication requires referencing previous messages. If everyone quotes messages with "> " then you can have several levels of quoted text and it will still be readable.
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1849.txt §4.3.2
This SHOULD be done by prefacing each quoted line (even if it is empty) with the character ">". This will result in multiple levels of ">" when quoted context itself contains quoted context.
FWIW, I found the post Russell complained about so unreadable that I skipped it entirely. I approve of explaining established conventions; it's entirely appropriate.
_______________________________________________ luv-talk mailing list luv-talk@lists.luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-talk
On 22/12/2013 7:12 AM, Anders Holmström wrote:
On 21/12/2013 9:01 PM, Michael Scott wrote:
[...] please have some rules, at least regarding posting on the 'net.
Like not top-posting? And trimming quoted material? :-)
Absolutely!!!! But way off-topic now.... :( Oh and definitely plain text posts to the lists as well, no html here. Cheers A.
On 22/12/13 07:12, Anders Holmström wrote:
Like not top-posting? And trimming quoted material? :-)
Also, while we're having a whinge about all things etiquette, I'd just like to add a complaint about people who use MUAs that don't make use of the References header properly, and thus screw up threading? People using IMP as their MUA seem to be the most serious offenders here. Seriously. Irritating. (Oh, and Merry Whatever, everyone).
participants (7)
-
achalmers＠westnet.com.au -
Anders Holmström -
Andrew McGlashan -
Michael Scott -
Paul Dwerryhouse -
Russell Coker -
Trent W. Buck