|
|
Posted by Michael Fesser on 01/22/07 18:22
..oO(Rik)
>Tim Roberts wrote:
>
>> Personally, I don't think it makes a bit of difference. Most people
>> quote way, way, WAY too much as it is; thanks to threading
>> newsreaders, all I need is the briefest reminder of what we were
>> talking about for context. When you cut quoting to a minimum, the
>> top/bottom thing becomes irrelevant.
>
>Quoting should always be at the top. And the reason to quote is something
>dear to me: in usenet, on thousands of servers, not every post get's
>through, and sometimes not even in the right order. So the quote is there
>to inform people who might not see the previous what was there, or at least
>in which direction this particular (sub) thread goes.
Yep, that's what a quote is for. But it's still no reason for a full
quote of a hundred lines or even more. Such a full quote at the top with
a short answer below it is even more annoying than a full bottom quote.
>Without the quote, I
>have no idea what the original post/topic/question was, which is highly
>frustrating... and unfortunately with a somewhat buggy newsserver atm not a
>very rare occurance for me.
Tim didn't suggest to quote nothing. The key is to quote _reasonably_ -
not too less, not too much. Many people here calling for bottom quotes
seem to forget the latter.
Micha
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|