Thank you, Jack & Chris. (01)
> [CM] I think the mashups we've been seeing,
> esp. from John Sowa, are an attempt to adhere
> to the (also arbitrary) one post per day rule. (02)
[ppy] I am in favor of totally getting rid of the 'one post per day'
practice ... as that was one of many suggestions suggested to address
a certain issue which we no longer have now ( ... and I actually have
always opposed to making rules that restricts people who don't need
the rules, when those who do, wouldn't even play by the rules.) (03)
> [CM] top-post ... (04)
[ppy] I do top-posting too, but in a way that what needs to be read is
available as the first thing on the message, with proper context ...
and then the original thread left at the bottom as a reference and
further contextual information (so that people don't really have to
look around, or go to the archives for them.) I know this is a bit
wasteful ... but storage and other technology has pretty much provided
us with the luxury now. (05)
May I, instead, ask posters to think of your readers more, when making
your post ... and that (if considered a rule at all) might already
suffice. (06)
Thanks & regards. =py
-- (07)
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Christopher Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2010, at 10:30 AM, Jack Park wrote:
>> I interpret 10-lines to really entail this thought: one subject/topic
>> per email message. Not mashups, as we presently see frequently. Keep
>> the "Subject" line fresh--a dictum I am violating simply for purposes
>> of illustrating the point.
>
> I think the mashups we've been seeing, esp. from John Sowa, are an attempt to
>adhere to the (also arbitrary) one post per day rule. I appreciated John's
>effort but I myself, like you it appears, would prefer multiple posts on
>different topics than a lengthy mashup, since it is too much effort to sift
>through the mashup if you're only interested in one topic.
>
> <soapbox>
> One practice that is to my mind inexcusable on a mailing list (which you also
>nicely illustrated to make the point) is to top-post in response to a point or
>two in a message and then leave the entire message (often complete with
>earlier top-posted replies of its own) containing those points hanging
>unedited at the bottom of one's own contribution. It is frankly rude to force
>one's readers to look through all of that cruft to figure out for themselves
>what one is responding to -- not to mention the fact that it is simply not in
>one's interest to do so, as top-posting can easily lead to errors of
>interpretation. It takes very little effort to edit out the irrelevant parts
>of a message and interleave one's comments into the relevant bits that remain
>so that one's post actually takes the form of a coherent conversation.
> </soapbox>
>
> -chris (08)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)
|