[MR] What's wrong with this picture? (was Re: The Alleged Cesspit That Is The Merry Rose)

[Michael Houghton]

Howdy!

On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Logan <Logan at ebonwoulfe.com> wrote:
> is the opposite not just as "true"?  that to claim it is "rude" for someone
> to embrace their ease of reading over the great majority of those using
> email clients ease of response?

The normal reading order is top to bottom. By putting the response after
the context, you minimize confusion. It is much more clear what you are
responding to. Forcing the reader to hold the answer while the go look
up the question works for Jeopardy, but not so much for orderly
conversation. If your email client makes it easier to top post then that
is a defect in your client. It's not a new problem. Clear communication
does take work.

> im asking because every once in a while
> this is brought up and i dont understand it because i use an email client
> that simply posts the responses (with no end to the thread below it) and its
> never been difficult to read, follow, or delete.

Rarely is it valuable to include the entire thread. That it doesn't get brought
up more frequently does not mean that it isn't a continual irritant. Email
clients vary widely in how they approach this.

> bottom posting is way more
> of a pain since that requires searching for the response instead of simply
> seeing it.

Which is more important? A naked response or a response with its context
clearly shown? Bottom posting requires a bit more work on the part of
the writer, but the writer should be concerned with making their response
more usable. Simply dashing something off (while often appropriate)
is not the route to substantial communication. As an alternative, you
can compose a response that mentions the context instead of quoting,
and then remove all extraneous material.

> i dont do any digests on any lists so i dont know what it looks
> like or why someone would choose to do so.  still, i dont know that its fair
> to claim someone as "exceedingly rude" simply because their way isnt your
> way.
>
Some people prefer digests because they would rather have the messages
batched into fewer items in their inbox.

If you don't bother trimming posts, you leave junk in the stream. Sometimes,
that means that 60% or more of the "content" of a message is excess
baggage. Forcing someone to have to scan over that to make sure there
isn't real content is an unwarranted imposition on the readers. Taking the
brief time to remove it before posting puts the burden where it should be --
on the writer -- to enhance the value of the communication.

[snip everything below your post including the list boilerplate twice]

yours,
Herveus
-- 
Michael Houghton   | Herveus d'Ormonde
herveus at gmail.com         | White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA            | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
                          | http://whitewolfandphoenix.com