On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 02:07:15PM +0000, Q wrote: > IF context is needed, then you scroll down and further down if you > need more. But how often is it necessary to read the context each > and every message? Why this insistence on the maximum amount of > effort -- lots and lots of scrolling -- just to read a reply? That assumes that you include the full message you respond to at the bottom of each reply. So after a 'months or even years' a simple 'Yes, OK' will include hundreds of useless lines. When you write a reply, your message will contain a reference to the one you reply to. If the full context is ever needed, every half-decent mail reader will find the original message before you can blink your eyes. > It's often not worth the effort of reading a lot of replies on the > list due to having to scroll past loads of earlier messages. That happens only if the replies quote the full original message, which is stupid. You quote the parts you respond to, and nothing else, and put your response to that part after the quote so the reader knows what you are referring to. In case you fail to grok this: the first paragraph I wrote refers to the first snippet quoted from your message, and so on. > It seems to me that the only problem is that bottom-posting clashes > with how people actually write messages in every other sphere of > life -- it (bottom-posting) is an outdated practice that needs to > die and allow mailing lists to move with the times. If 'moving with the times' means being ignorant and rude then you're probably right. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
