Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #27206 > unrolled thread

Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8)

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-08-17 08:36 +1000
    Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Madison May <worldpeaceagentforchange@gmail.com> - 2012-08-16 15:42 -0700
    Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Madison May <worldpeaceagentforchange@gmail.com> - 2012-08-16 15:42 -0700
      Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2012-08-17 01:19 -0400
        Re: Top-posting &c. Ulrich Eckhardt <ulrich.eckhardt@dominolaser.com> - 2012-08-17 09:18 +0200
          RE: Top-posting &c. "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-08-20 22:49 +0000
            Re: Top-posting &c. Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-08-21 03:43 +0000
            Re: Top-posting &c. Ulrich Eckhardt <ulrich.eckhardt@dominolaser.com> - 2012-08-21 10:15 +0200
              RE: Top-posting &c. "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-08-24 13:53 +0000
                Re: Top-posting &c. Ramchandra Apte <maniandram01@gmail.com> - 2012-08-24 07:23 -0700
                  Re: Top-posting &c. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-24 15:43 +0100
                Re: Top-posting &c. Ramchandra Apte <maniandram01@gmail.com> - 2012-08-24 07:23 -0700
                  Re: Top-posting &c. rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-08-24 08:58 -0700
                    Re: Top-posting &c. rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-08-24 09:39 -0700
              Re: Top-posting &c. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-08-25 03:49 +1000
        Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-08-17 09:36 -0700
          Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-08-18 01:43 +0000
            Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Zero Piraeus <schesis@gmail.com> - 2012-08-17 21:54 -0400
            Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmichel@sequans.com> - 2012-08-20 17:09 +0200
          Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-08-18 15:34 +0000
            Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-08-18 10:27 -0700
              Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-08-19 07:15 +0000
                Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-08-19 17:46 +1000
                Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) python@bdurham.com - 2012-08-19 08:43 -0400
                Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-08-20 00:31 -0700
                  Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-08-20 17:46 +1000
                  Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-20 09:12 +0100
      Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Jurko Gospodnetić <jurko.gospodnetic@pke.hr> - 2012-08-17 09:52 +0200
      Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Alex Strickland <sscc@mweb.co.za> - 2012-08-21 08:07 +0200
        Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-08-21 07:59 +0000
      Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2012-08-21 13:14 -0400
        Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2012-08-22 07:25 +0100
          Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-22 08:35 +0100
    Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-08-17 00:39 -0700
    Re: Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8) Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-08-17 13:03 +0000
      Re: Top-posting &c. Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2012-08-18 15:59 +1000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#27206 — Top-posting &c. (was Re: [ANNC] pybotwar-0.8)

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:40 AM, Ramchandra Apte <maniandram01@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16 August 2012 21:00, Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> and "bottom" reads better than "top"
>>
> Look you are the only person complaining about top-posting.
> GMail uses top-posting by default.
> I can't help it if you feel irritated by it.

I post using gmail, and I just delete two blank lines at the top and
go down the bottom to type. But on the way down, I also trim quoted
text, so people don't have to download and read the entire thread for
every new post. It's not difficult, you should give it a try some
time!

And FWIW, I add my voice to those who prefer to read replies
underneath the original text. Even if Mark were the only person vocal
enough to complain, you can still rest assured that there are many
more who agree. You've now heard from quite a few regular posters;
there are probably several *hundred* lurkers who feel the same way,
but do not post (possibly because they cannot). Also, these mails get
archived all over the internet, so a generation not yet born can read
and be either enlightened or irritated, as the case may be.

ChrisA

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#27207

> And FWIW, I add my voice to those who prefer to read replies
> 
> underneath the original text. Even if Mark were the only person vocal
> 
> enough to complain, you can still rest assured that there are many
> 
> more who agree. You've now heard from quite a few regular posters;
> 
> there are probably several *hundred* lurkers who feel the same way,
> 
> but do not post (possibly because they cannot). Also, these mails get
> 
> archived all over the internet, so a generation not yet born can read
> 
> and be either enlightened or irritated, as the case may be.
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisA


As a lurker, I agree completely with Chris's sentiments. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27209

> And FWIW, I add my voice to those who prefer to read replies
> 
> underneath the original text. Even if Mark were the only person vocal
> 
> enough to complain, you can still rest assured that there are many
> 
> more who agree. You've now heard from quite a few regular posters;
> 
> there are probably several *hundred* lurkers who feel the same way,
> 
> but do not post (possibly because they cannot). Also, these mails get
> 
> archived all over the internet, so a generation not yet born can read
> 
> and be either enlightened or irritated, as the case may be.
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisA


As a lurker, I agree completely with Chris's sentiments. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27222

On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:42:54 -0700 (PDT), Madison May
<worldpeaceagentforchange@gmail.com> declaimed the following in
gmane.comp.python.general:


> 
> As a lurker, I agree completely with Chris's sentiments. 

	I've been holding back on quoting the "netiquette RFC"... I also
tend to blame M$ (Outlook and variants) for this tendency to quote
everything and top-post -- Outlook makes it almost impossible to do a
trim&interleave response style.

	Including everything as a trailing quote may be okay in an office
environment, where it serves more as a photocopy included with an paper
mail response. But anyone "raised" on 2400bps dial-up on a service that
charged by the minute (GEnie, Compuserve, et al) rapidly learned to use
as a log-in/pull/log-off/read-reply/log-in/send system, and to remove as
much $$ quoted text as possible.
-- 
	Wulfraed                 Dennis Lee Bieber         AF6VN
        wlfraed@ix.netcom.com    HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27228 — Re: Top-posting &c.

I that Outlook & Co are guilty. That and the fact that few people even 
think about this. Even today that makes sense, because it provides an 
exact context. Without that, you wouldn't be able to really understand 
what exactly a person is referring to. Also, it helps people to 
structure their thoughts better.

If the above paragraph doesn't make sense to you, see it interleaved 
below for enlightenment. ;)


Am 17.08.2012 07:19, schrieb Dennis Lee Bieber:
> I also tend to blame M$ (Outlook and variants) for this tendency to
> quote everything and top-post -- Outlook makes it almost impossible
> to do a trim&interleave response style.

I that Outlook & Co are guilty. That and the fact that few people even 
think about this.


> 	Including everything as a trailing quote may be okay in an office
> environment, where it serves more as a photocopy included with an paper
> mail response. But anyone "raised" on 2400bps dial-up on a service that
> charged by the minute (GEnie, Compuserve, et al) rapidly learned to use
> as a log-in/pull/log-off/read-reply/log-in/send system, and to remove as
> much $$ quoted text as possible.

Even today that makes sense, because it provides an exact context. 
Without that, you wouldn't be able to really understand what exactly a 
person is referring to. Also, it helps people to structure their 
thoughts better.


I tend to disagree with the bandwidth argument, which is obsolete. To 
me, it's more about communication efficiency and it's only one possible 
way to achieve that.

Uli

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27536 — RE: Top-posting &c.

> > I also tend to blame M$ (Outlook and variants) for this tendency to
> > quote everything and top-post -- Outlook makes it almost impossible
> > to do a trim&interleave response style.
> 
> I that Outlook & Co are guilty. That and the fact that few people even
> think about this.

Nonsense, I post only from Outlook. You can do it and it is not hard.
It is just requires a little effort. 

Top posting makes more sense in a corporate setting for a couple reasons. 
Seeing the exact email trail rather than what someone considers "relevant" 
context can be very useful. Not to mention that frequently corporate email 
is more like slow instant messaging; I need less context (e.g. 
conversation  history) and get all the information I need from what the 
sender is writing. 

I find inline (and to a lesser extent bottom) posting to be a mixed bag. 
Some people do it well and it is easy to read, but there are others who 
do not make it as easy (for me) to read. Lots of posts are not trimmed 
enough, or trimmed too much. 

I am not advocating top-posting. I just think that different styles are 
good for different cases/environments. Blame the person, not the 
application for having poor habits and/or being inconsiderate of the 
community. :)

Ramit

P.S. Ironically, I do blame Outlook for making it hard (impossible?) 
to find/see the 80 char boundary.
This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and
conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of
securities, accuracy and completeness of information, viruses,
confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers,
available at http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27544 — Re: Top-posting &c.

On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 22:49:24 +0000, Prasad, Ramit wrote:

>> > I also tend to blame M$ (Outlook and variants) for this tendency to
>> > quote everything and top-post -- Outlook makes it almost impossible
>> > to do a trim&interleave response style.
>> 
>> I that Outlook & Co are guilty. That and the fact that few people even
>> think about this.
> 
> Nonsense, I post only from Outlook. You can do it and it is not hard. It
> is just requires a little effort.
> 
> Top posting makes more sense in a corporate setting for a couple
> reasons. Seeing the exact email trail rather than what someone considers
> "relevant" context can be very useful.

That's what your email archive, and the threading information in the 
email headers, is for.

When people used to correspond by paper mail, they did not photocopy the 
entire past correspondence and staple it to the back of their letter. And 
then the person responding didn't photocopy the photocopies and post them 
back with his response. If somebody did, that would be stupid -- did he 
think the sender posted the originals and didn't keep a copy?

If there was a business requirement to make copies of copies of copies, 
people would have done it. But there wasn't, and it was stupid and costly 
and so they didn't.

With email, it's less costly, but it's equally stupid. Email programs 
reduce the cost of making and posting those photocopies to essentially 
zero, at least zero for the person pressing Send.

It might be almost free for the sender, but it's still stupid. Nobody 
looks at those deep email trails. When you want to find out the order of 
correspondence, you sort your mail folder by Thread or by Date and look 
at it there, not by trying to interpret the copies of copies of copies of 
past discussions. Nobody uses them. They just bulk up email and get in 
the way of communication and make searching for relevant emails harder.

I've had to dig through email archives for legal purposes, looking for 
evidence in legal cases, and having to read past copies of copies of 
copies of copies (down to ten or twelve levels deep!!!) makes the process 
much, much, much harder than it should be.

Top posting in and of itself is not always bad. But the practice of 
leaving copies of copies of copies in the body of the email is beyond 
stupid. If they were *attachments* that could be ignored when printed, 
that would be *almost* sane, but putting them in the body of the email is 
insane.


> Not to mention that frequently
> corporate email is more like slow instant messaging; I need less context
> (e.g. conversation  history) and get all the information I need from
> what the sender is writing.

In my experience, if you ask a question in corporate environments by 
email, you're lucky to get an answer within a day. Slow indeed.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27560 — Re: Top-posting &c.

Am 21.08.2012 00:49, schrieb Prasad, Ramit:
>>> I also tend to blame M$ (Outlook and variants) for this tendency to
>>> quote everything and top-post -- Outlook makes it almost impossible
>>> to do a trim&interleave response style.
>>
>> I [think] that Outlook & Co are guilty. That and the fact that few
>> people even think about this.
>
> Nonsense, I post only from Outlook. You can do it and it is not hard.
> It is just requires a little effort.

A good tool would reduce the effort and guide users, like e.g. giving 
them a hint if they leave the whole mail they're replying to as copy. 
Several corporate email solutions (like MS Outlook/Exchange) put very 
little emphasis on communication efficiency but only on eye-candy 
features. Their popularity and the resulting influence on people has 
caused decay in average communication culture, and that is what I blame 
them for.


BTW: You omitted the attribution line for the text you quoted, whom do 
you blame for that? That said, "Nonsense" is a strong enough word to 
start a flamewar... not nice.

;^)

Uli

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27796 — RE: Top-posting &c.

Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
> A good tool would reduce the effort and guide users, like e.g. giving
> them a hint if they leave the whole mail they're replying to as copy.
> Several corporate email solutions (like MS Outlook/Exchange) put very
> little emphasis on communication efficiency but only on eye-candy
> features. Their popularity and the resulting influence on people has
> caused decay in average communication culture, and that is what I blame
> them for.

True, but it is by no means impossible or very difficult. It just requires
some effort. I blame the user more and the software less because of quotes 
like below.

[ Not Ulrich ]
> GMail uses top-posting by default. 


[ Back to Ulrich ]
> BTW: You omitted the attribution line for the text you quoted, whom do
> you blame for that? That said, "Nonsense" is a strong enough word to
> start a flamewar... not nice.
Fair enough. I typically leave off attribution because I would rather
to discuss things with quotes instead of he-said and she-said. The
focus should be on the idea/conversation and less about attributing
"blame" to someone (and it is invariably more often negative attribution
than positive). If attribution is preferred, I suppose I could always 
add it back in. Ironically, this is one of the things I wish Outlook
was better about.

Ramit

This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and
conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of
securities, accuracy and completeness of information, viruses,
confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers,
available at http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27797 — Re: Top-posting &c.

As BFDL, I hereby command everybody to stop the discussion.
lets put time on useful stuff

i am using google groups (i think it knows what to do)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27803 — Re: Top-posting &c.

On 24/08/2012 15:23, Ramchandra Apte wrote:
> As BFDL, I hereby command everybody to stop the discussion.
> lets put time on useful stuff

Well I didn't vote for you :)

>
> i am using google groups (i think it knows what to do)
>


-- 
Cheers.

Mark Lawrence.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27798 — Re: Top-posting &c.

As BFDL, I hereby command everybody to stop the discussion.
lets put time on useful stuff

i am using google groups (i think it knows what to do)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27807 — Re: Top-posting &c.

On Aug 24, 7:23 pm, Ramchandra Apte <maniandra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As BFDL, I hereby command everybody to stop the discussion.
> lets put time on useful stuff
>
> i am using google groups (i think it knows what to do)

Your posts are coming in doubles.
And the quoted lines are coming double-spaced!

Actually the 'new' google groups is considerably more messed up than
the old.
And usually its hard to choose the old.

No offense intended... Just that since I was the one to recommend you
use gg, I feel obliged on conscience to mention this.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27813 — Re: Top-posting &c.

On Aug 24, 8:58 pm, rusi <rustompm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 24, 7:23 pm, Ramchandra Apte <maniandra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > As BFDL, I hereby command everybody to stop the discussion.
> > lets put time on useful stuff
>
> > i am using google groups (i think it knows what to do)
>
> Your posts are coming in doubles.
> And the quoted lines are coming double-spaced!

Just saw other double-posts
So checked the mailing list archive which does not seem to have them.

So please ignore my double-post comment (for now).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27815 — Re: Top-posting &c.

On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Prasad, Ramit
<ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> wrote:
> Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
>> BTW: You omitted the attribution line for the text you quoted, whom do
>> you blame for that? That said, "Nonsense" is a strong enough word to
>> start a flamewar... not nice.
> Fair enough. I typically leave off attribution because I would rather
> to discuss things with quotes instead of he-said and she-said. The
> focus should be on the idea/conversation and less about attributing
> "blame" to someone (and it is invariably more often negative attribution
> than positive). If attribution is preferred, I suppose I could always
> add it back in. Ironically, this is one of the things I wish Outlook
> was better about.

PLEASE add attribution back in. It's not about he-said/she-said, it's
about honesty and clarity in reporting. It's far easier to understand
the conversation when we know who said each part, and the normal
opening line that most mail clients put in has a handy condensed set
of headers.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27247

On Aug 17, 10:19 am, Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:42:54 -0700 (PDT), Madison May
> <worldpeaceagentforcha...@gmail.com> declaimed the following in
> gmane.comp.python.general:
>
>
>
> > As a lurker, I agree completely with Chris's sentiments.
>
>         I've been holding back on quoting the "netiquette RFC"... I also
> tend to blame M$ (Outlook and variants) for this tendency to quote
> everything and top-post -- Outlook makes it almost impossible to do a
> trim&interleave response style.
>
>         Including everything as a trailing quote may be okay in an office
> environment, where it serves more as a photocopy included with an paper
> mail response.

I was in a corporate environment for a while.  And carried my
'trim&interleave' habits there.
And got gently scolded for seeming to hide things!!

Just mentioning that there are cultures other than this one.

Of course, "Do in Rome as romans do" is universally sound advice,
(with Rome suitably parameterized), so its best to follow the
netiquette of the forum you are using.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27275

On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 09:36:04 -0700, rusi wrote:

> I was in a corporate environment for a while.  And carried my
> 'trim&interleave' habits there.
> And got gently scolded for seeming to hide things!!

Corporate email users are generally incompetent at email no matter what 
email conventions you use. I cannot tell you the number of times I have 
emailed somebody, top-posted, explicitly said "We have three questions 
blocking progress, please answer all three", asked the three questions in 
clearly numbered bullet points... and got an answer back to the first and 
not even an acknowledgement of the other two.

Nevertheless, I've taken up writing at the top of emails

"My replies are interleaved with your questions which are shown starting 
with > symbols."

to make it obvious that they should keep reading.

It *is* possible to top-post and communicate effectively, it just takes a 
LOT more work, and the sorts of people who prefer top posting simply 
don't do it. Top-posting only works for shallow communication: simple 
questions, simple replies, and shallow threads, two or three replies at 
most. It's good for emails like:

    Subject: Meet you at the pub on Friday afternoon?

    See u there!!!

    --- Original Message ---

    Hey bro, want to catch up for drinks at the pub on Friday? 


but lousy for long *discussion* threads where people are replying to 
potentially dozens of separate issues within a single email.

To communicate effectively in email, you need to assume that your reader 
has forgotten the context of your reply, since they may have. They are 
probably dealing with dozens of other similar emails. A thread may go on 
for a week, or the question may have been asked a month ago and the reply 
only sent now. In long discussions, subjects may drift so that the 
subject line is no longer appropriate, or it may be a generic subject 
line.

In interleaved email, the quoted text acts as a refresher of previous 
content. If you don't interleave, you are responsible for adding context. 
Rather than:

"Sort the list first."

write something like:

"Your binary search is failing because the list is unsorted. Sort the 
list first."

That's a trivial example. In practice this becomes a PITA real fast, 
which is why top-posting discourages discussion in depth and encourages 
short, shallow, context-free replies.


> Just mentioning that there are cultures other than this one.

There are cultures that marry five year old girls to sixty year old men, 
cultures that treat throwing acid in the faces of women as acceptable 
behaviour, cultures that allow war heroes to die of hunger and cold 
homeless in the street, and cultures that top-post. What's your point?


> Of course, "Do in Rome as romans do" is universally sound advice, (with
> Rome suitably parameterized), so its best to follow the netiquette of
> the forum you are using.

Unless you think you can change the culture of Rome by example.


-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27277

:

On 17 August 2012 21:43, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> There are cultures that marry five year old girls to sixty year old men,
> cultures that treat throwing acid in the faces of women as acceptable
> behaviour, cultures that allow war heroes to die of hunger and cold
> homeless in the street, and cultures that top-post. What's your point?

+1 QOTW

 -[]z.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27501

Zero Piraeus wrote:
> :
>
> On 17 August 2012 21:43, Steven D'Aprano
> <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
>   
>> There are cultures that marry five year old girls to sixty year old men,
>> cultures that treat throwing acid in the faces of women as acceptable
>> behaviour, cultures that allow war heroes to die of hunger and cold
>> homeless in the street, and cultures that top-post. What's your point?
>>     
>
> +1 QOTW
>
>  -[]z.
>   
We're closer to the +1 godwin point

JM

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27300

On 2012-08-17, rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:

> I was in a corporate environment for a while.  And carried my
> 'trim&interleave' habits there. And got gently scolded for seeming to
> hide things!!

I have, rarely, gotten the opposite raction from "corporate e-mailers"
used to top posting.  I got one comment something like "That's cool
how you interleaved your reponses -- it's like having a real
conversation."

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! Somewhere in Tenafly,
                                  at               New Jersey, a chiropractor
                              gmail.com            is viewing "Leave it to
                                                   Beaver"!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web