Rockbox.org home
release
dev builds
extras
themes manual
wiki
device status forums
mailing lists
IRC bugs
patches
dev guide



Rockbox mail archive

Subject: Re: Email ettiquette (was RE: windows won't detect my ipod)

Re: Email ettiquette (was RE: windows won't detect my ipod)

From: Tyler Wood <tcwood12_at_shaw.ca>
Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2007 07:06:36 -0600

Have a good day
- Tyler Wood

---
Tyler Wood
skype: the_conman283
msn/windows messinger: the_conman283_at_hotmail.com
e-mail: tcwood12_at_shaw.ca
best tv guide on the internet:
http://www.zap2it.com
best internet radio:
http://www.bluebeat.com
soon to have a live journal!
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Christopher Woods" <christof_at_infinitus.co.uk>
To: "'Rockbox'" <rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se>
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 11:46 PM
Subject: RE: Email ettiquette (was RE: windows won't detect my ipod)
> Imho, I don't have trouble following conversations; if I want context, I
> just flick back through a couple of the emails with the same topic and 
> read
> up what it's about - usually one message has enough of a contextual clue 
> so
> as to give me an idea of what it's in reference to, and I work from there.
>
> If I want to be really precise, I would snip out bits from a previous 
> email
> and reply underneath them - but in general someone having a conversation
> with someone else listens to what the other person said, and then responds
> to it in one go, not in a series of exact, call-and-response type lines -
> it's blocks of text with ideas posited, suggestions put forth, etc... It
> just seems to me like a much more natural way of holding a conversation. 
> If
> you want to read back through a tree-structure, there's always the online
> archives to do that, and one can always just scroll down through the list 
> of
> incoming messages to read back on the subject.
>
> So, for in-lining, where as you say it's responding with only one thing
> needing a reply, would you not agree that it's a waste of both bytes and
> time including allllllll that text (abbreviated or not) and THEN putting 
> the
> response, instead of just putting it at the top where it's instantly
> viewable, especially if it's only regarding one thing from the previous
> email? It's a more conversational style of correspondence, a quicker way 
> of
> viewing responses, etc.
>
> I do heed the rules though and I do bear in mind that this list is biased
> against top-posting. I'm glad that most people on here are at least 
> willing
> to be a little flexible sometimes when the need arises, if I was a blind
> person and confronted with pages and pages of old message with the replies
> right at the bottom, I'd get very frustrated after a while.
>
>
> The style clash of top- and bottom-posting continues to provide a source 
> of
> great fascination for me... I was never part of the usenet generation; do
> you think maybe that that's influencing my style choice somewhat?
>
Well, to be honest, I've hardly saw any bottom-posting until now. So, I find 
it a bit strange, to say the least. 
Received on 2007-03-03

Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew
aaa