On Sun, 13 Jan 2013, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On 13/01/13 11:21, Alexandre Couture wrote: >> >> >>> On Sunday 13 January 2013 08:06:43 Dan Youngquist wrote: >>> <snip> >>>> >>>> So, I hope we can convince folks to trim their replies a little more. >>> >>> +25 :-) >>> >>> G. >> >> Just throwing an idea like that: >> Wouldn't a forum be a better platform than mailling list? >> It also avoid top-posting and trim problems... > > No it wouldn't be better, and no forums don't avoid posting issues. > > Forums are a "pull" technology: I have to actively decide to go to some > website and look for new comments or questions, then keep refreshing the > page periodically to see replies to questions. Even if there is some sort > of notification service (like a RSS feed), nevertheless I must still make > the decision to actively open a tab in a browser and go to the forum. > > Email is a "push" technology: new comments and questions just appear in > my inbox without me needing to go out and look for them. So long as I > monitor this one location, my inbox, I will see these messages. > you pretty much say it, I wrote a response which I didn't send which put it this way, I like getting mail delivered to my door (or screen); don't want to pick it up at the post-office. > I already have, at quick count, well over 120 assorted tabs open in five > different browsers on two machines. If I had to actively monitor this list > by viewing a web page, I wouldn't. > > As for posting issues, it is probably true that web forums *reduce* the > hassle caused by top-posting and failure to trim. But that's only because > forum software usually defaults to "no quote" replies: replies have have > no context, except that they are part of some thread. In small threads, > or in sufficiently well-written and explicit replies, you don't need much > to establish context. But as threads get bigger, or as writers get lazier > or less competent, you still need to establish context. I cannot begin to > tell you how many forum discussions I have seen with replies that give > *no clue* who, or which specific comment, they are replying to. let's add that some forum software will 'thread' replies by indenting them; this helps visually though it can be overwhelming too and it doesn't obviate the need to cite context as you point out. really, the rules are pretty simple: a) generally bottom-post (not necessarily always); b) if the post is complex, 'interweave', as Glen Cunningham puts; c) trim what is not needed (perhaps indicate trims with a "[...]" or similar (some insert a pseudo-latin word 'deletia', sniff!). until I hear from other contendas, I'm going to declare you, Steven, "King of the Tabs" -- 120 tabs open at once! F. -- Felmon Davis If you are a fatalist, what can you do about it? -- Ann Edwards-Duff