Re: WHAT kind of paranoia is this??
- At 2:47 am ((PDT)) Wed Aug 1, 2007, Jose Bonanca wrote:
>2. WHAT kind of paranoia is this??Paranoia: A game for the whole family, and
anyone else who might be watching.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean
they're not out to get you.
> Posted by: "Jose Bonanca" jbct1aos@... ct1aosNo, I'm trying to use the Internet economically and
> Date: Wed Aug 1, 2007 2:47 am ((PDT))
>Or are you _trying_ to look stupid? ;-)
in this case read the Daily Digest which is regularly
filled with the vomit of past messages by careless
I don't need them: I have a mailbox full of them,
often several times over.
You don't need them: if you don't keep old mail,
there is a group Archive. If you can't access the
archive on the Web, perhaps you _should_ keep
your old messages.
They are a waste of time, of money and of
archive space - which may eventually run out.
So many of them are irrelevant, they make
searching the archive less effective.
And most of all, they make reading the Digest
a PITA because there is so much trash to scroll
through and spotting the next message is made
Oh, and Yahoo asks you not to do it:
>From Yahoo! Groups Help: ... trim all the irrelevant quoted textLady Bracknell: To lose one parent, Mr. Worthing,
>out of your message (as a courtesy to the other members of
>the group to make the digest easier to read).
>So far you have advertised that people is using too much bandwidth
>but now you started to call names...
may be regarded as a misfortune;
to lose both looks like carelessness.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Did Forrest Gump say that? He should have.
>this is what is incredible. You want to educateNo, I want to use a resource the way it was designed
>your way a whole reflector.
to be used without thoughtless people crapping on me.
I would like the dog-walkers here to scoop up after,
to leave the park a pretty place for others to enjoy.
>Many times its much faster just to hit REPLY,Yes, it is called top-posting and note that I didn't
>if you know what it means,
complain directly about this - I'm not totally opposed
to top-posting - but of the lack of _trimming_ which
usually follows, as if the poster's attention span
doesn't extend to the right of his cursor.
Perhaps top-posting damages the brain - it certainly
hurts mine, as I often-times tyr to understand what
was so blindingly obvious to the poster in the heat of
the moment that he didn't care to give any clue to the
interpretation of his cryptogram by people who are
somewhere else thinking about something completely
different when they read it.
Just because Bill Gates has made it easy, that doesn't
mean it should be everyone's way of life.
You should view the positioning of the editing cursor at
the top of the message as an invitation to move through
the post deleting irrelevancy and inserting your reply
interleaved in context or, it you reach it first, at the
bottom of the quote and usually the quote should be brief.
[Sometimes - and especially if a long initial quote is
needed - it may be appropriate to begin with your
own comment to establish the nature of your reply.]
On a discussion list, if you top-post why quote at all?
It doesn't provide an introductory context to your post
so it is of little help in getting the reader's thought
processes in tune with whatever yours were when
you read it and composed your reply.
So, if you top-post your response should be capable
of standing on its own, especially if the quote has
already been munged by a succession of bad quoting
habits so that it is near-impossible to recognize to
which point, if any, your response might be a reply.
It is simply a case of whether you have sufficient regard
for the wisdom of your own words to present them in a
way that your readers can readily comprehend them,
and respect for their investment of time in reading them.
>Many times its much faster just to hit REPLY,And don't care what it _does_
>if you know what it means,
Many times it is faster not to stop at stop signs and
red traffic lights but it is still sociopathic behaviour.
I suppose you also expect pets and children to
learn the wisdom and practicality of toilet-training
spontaneously - and meanwhile hope that the little
piles on the carpet will go away of their own accord.
>andWhat "same thing"?
>besides in your last post you did the same thing.
* I _didn't_ top-post
> A: Because it destroys the flow of the conversation* I _did_ trim the quote
>Q: Why is top-posting bad?
(That's what "[snip]" means, BTW, and perhaps
you didn't notice that I _counted_ the 180 lines
of irrelevant quote, not quoted them.
* My signature file had a correct dash-dash-space
delimiter and only five lines of text - with a lesson
worth learning, good advice then and worthy of
consideration now. And I select the signature
according to the circumstances, so if people
trim I won't remind them at length of rfc1855.
So, what "same thing"?
>Think about not to be annoyed and do not annoy us.Yeah, right: "But apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln,
how did you enjoy the play?"
I could be doing more useful things, if there wasn't
the need to counter people like you who encourage
Content of a follow-up post should exceed quoted content. (rfc1855)