|
Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Email ettiquette (was RE: windows won't detect my ipod)Re: Email ettiquette (was RE: windows won't detect my ipod)
From: Matthew Caron <matt_at_mattcaron.net>
Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2007 00:29:02 -0500 > it the 'classical' way. ;) I find top-posted replies easier to read, it's > quicker, for me anyway, to view an entire conversation just based on jumping > to each email received in chronological order with the same topic. Then how do you know what someone is responding to? My problem with any-type of non-inline responding is that it lacks precision. For example, you know that I am specifically responding to what you said quoted above. > at least, there's no appreciable downsides to doing it, because you do have > the original message below the reply for clarity or context should you wish > to read it Which is even more confusing than when someone replies inline. > It's the classic 'old skool vs. nu skool' debate once again - I guess I'm in > the nu skool camp of email users insofar as method in which I write my > replies :) Or, conversely, you're in the old-old-school. You might as well be writing letters, no? :-) > Thoughts? Obvious pros/cons for top/bottom posting? In-lining (including bottom posting, which is basically an in-line reply with only one thing needing a reply) gives context and removes confusion. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- PGP Key: http://www.mattcaron.net/pgp_key.txt ~~ Matt Caron ~~Received on 2007-03-03 Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy |