Board index » cppbuilder » Re: DeXter C++ Quality Central bugs resolved so far...

2005-10-07 05:40:56 AM
cppbuilder103
Oh nay
. Ed

Some of us use news readers which show the messages ordered by thread and
which mark unread messages with bold titles.
We don't want to see the previous messages at the top. We selected the
message to see what it says, not what the previous ones said. If we need a
bit more to amplify what we see, we can look at the quoted part at the
bottom or click the up-arrow to see the previous message.
. Ed

At 23:44:17, 06.10.2005, Ed Mulroy wrote:
to remind me what I'm reading about. Quoting entire messages is
absolutely the worst thing you can do.
Why do I want a short quote? Because threads are seldom read at once,
from top to bottom. Threads develop slowly, and in the meantime, I have
been reading in other threads about other topics, or have been away from
the computer for a short or long time. The reply I'm reading may be to a
message posted two days ago. In the meantime, I have read hundreds of
other messages already.
That is the sole reason for quotes: to give a short reminder what the
discussion was about (or at least to what the message replies). So, if I
need the quotes, I want them to be in chronological order. It is IMO
extremly silly to read such things in a reverse way, like top-posters do.
Funny enough, if top-posters think they must reply to several aspects of
a long post, and reply inline, and then they do it chronologically, and
do not post their answers before the questions. That is extremely
inconsistent, IMO.
The top-poster's argument that he or she doesn't want to read the quote
doesn't fly with me. If the quote is not read, then what good are quotes?
In that case, entirely omit them.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"USA Today has come out with a new survey: Apparently three out of four
people make up 75 percent of the population." -- David Letterman.
 

{smallsort}

At 23:44:17, 06.10.2005, Ed Mulroy wrote:
newsreader should do. <g,d&r>
And I know that MSOE is probably the world's biggest offender, since it
makes anything but top-posting rather tedious. Real newsreaders either
give you the choice, or simple do it properly to begin with.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction."
-- Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872 .
 

At 00:02:13, 07.10.2005, Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting
<<
Top-posting is considered improper by many definitions of Internet
etiquette since it breaks down the flow of the thread:
Netiquette Guidelines
<<
- If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
enough text of the original to give a context. This will make
sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a
response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context
helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!
Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting
www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/documents/quotingguide.html
How to reply to messages on Usenet and e-mails or the art of quoting
www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
How do I quote correctly in Usenet?
etc.etc.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"Love is the answer - but while you're waiting for the answer sex
raises some pretty good questions." -- Woody Allen
 

Ed Mulroy wrote:
every message in the thread when a new one arrives. There may not be a
place to "arrow up" to.
.a
 

Ed Mulroy wrote:
That's ridiculous! Top posting is ridiculous.
.a
 

At 23:40:56, 06.10.2005, Ed Mulroy wrote:
that how you think it should be, i.e. that I must first scroll down to
read the quote, and then go back to the top to see what you wrote about
it?
Makes absolutely no sense to me. I prefer to read from top to bottom.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"Wit makes its own welcome and levels all distinctions."
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
 

But top posters don't feel the need to generate pages and pages of notes
on why their method is best... <G>(remainder of post left in place
intentionally)
David Erbas-White
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote:

At 00:47:14, 07.10.2005, David Erbas-White wrote:
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"Computers are useless; they can only give you answers."
-- Pablo Picasso
 

"Randall Parker" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
message news:4345954e$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
 

"Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
again, it doesn't do NTTP.
 

At 01:14:41, 07.10.2005, Duane Hebert wrote:
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] velthuis.homepage.t-online.de
"I failed to make the chess team because of my height." -- Woody Allen
 

"Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
t{*word*220}. The one that I hate is Outlook.
It's impossible to reply to someone sending
you mail from Outlook without adding all of
the>>manually.
 

I can find plenty of religious fanatics out on the web for many different religions.
Christianity, Islam, Java, Emacs, Microsoft, etc.
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote: