[Gambas-user] Test of mail received

[T Lee Davidson]

On 12/6/19 6:23 AM, Christof Thalhofer wrote:
>> And, on an unrelated note: would it be possible to include a link to
>> the mail archive in the footer of mail sent from the list?
 >
> This is a good idea. At the beginning we had that, but Benoît didn't
> like it, because as people quoted each other and did not remove the
> footer(s), the quoted mails were full of that and hardly readable. So it
> did not work.

And, all that unnecessary kludge is the reason I prefer top-posting. And, of course, it allows me to be lazy.


> If the members had knowledge about how and what to quote [snip]
> 
> But then the people here should agree, some of them should change their
> behavior and we all should instruct newbies to behave like that.

If members would judiciously snip quoted messages, I would have no problem with bottom-posting. In fact, I would prefer it since 
top-posting has always seemed illogical to me. So, I will be changing my behavior to bottom-posting now.


> Maybe we could write a "nettiquette" page or a FAQ which contains
> instructions on how to quote so that mails in long threads are easy

That's a good idea. We could put up a page on the Wiki and link to it in the footer like:
"Please BOTTOM-POST and trim your replies: [link]

Here's a page draft of what I worked up real quick:

Top-posting is the practice of replying to a message by typing your response above that to which you are responding. This is 
both confusing and annoying because your readers will have to scroll down and extract the essentials of the existing thread in 
order to grasp the context of your reply; and then scroll back up again to read your reply.

Posting a "me too" comment at the bottom of a 100+ line message is no better because people have to scroll all the way down 
through 100+ lines they've already read in order to see your one-liner. One word comes to mind for that: frustrating. Your 
message is far more likely to be deleted without being read if you have too much quoted material before your reply.

The generally accepted "right way" of doing things is called "inline posting", whereby you insert your comments straight after 
that on which you are commenting, having stripped unnecessary text from the original quoted text. The end result is something 
which makes much more sense because it reads like a conversation.

When following up a post, please think before you quote. Since everybody else on the list also got the original post, don't 
quote it entirely. Quote only the parts that are relevant to your response. Make sure the quoted part is recognizable as such, 
by ensuring each quoted line starts with a > (or more >>, in case of multi-level quoting). Don't quote signatures or entire 
posts. Don't quote the standard signature.

Please don't use tabs or multiple spaces to quote text. Use the "> " sequence instead. Using whitespace to quote text makes it 
difficult to differentiate between what's quoted and the reply. And don't try to be cute or "different" and use some other 
character like "}" or whatever. Again, it's confusing. It wastes people's time.

Please try to have halfway reasonable spelling and grammar. When reading text with really bad spelling or grammar, people will 
have difficulty trying to understand your post.

Please don't have long, inflammatory, controversial or offensive signatures. The rule of thumb is no more than 4 lines of 80 
characters each.

For more "Netiquette" guidelines, see RFC 1855 [https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt].

Portions copied and/or adapted from:
http://vger.kernel.org/lkml/#s3-9
http://linux.sgms-centre.com/misc/netiquette.php#toppost


___
Lee
P.S. I think paragraph six is essential ;-)