On Thu, 24 Jul 2003, Robert L. Harris wrote:
> On the other hand if everyone posted at the top it would be considerably
> easier reading for those who have been following the conversation
> without having to scroll down and figure out where comments and the
> conversation is at. You could read just the top post and go from there.
> For those new to the conversation they can just start at the bottom and
> scroll up. When the next post comes in they just read the top post
> again instead of scrolling down to the bottom or middle somewhere to
> figure out what/when/where.
>
> Using VI and Mutt, the cursor starts at the top not the bottom or
> anywhere in the middle so there's and ease of use for CLI mail readers
> as well instead of the GUI oriented.
I tried to make the point that top posting is useful when (and only when)
it is short and does not require the context of the previous posts, it
saves the reader time to have it all up front.
Example 1:
Subject: 2.6.0-test2-ac1 OOPS with ZIP and DVD
Appropriate top post:
Fixed in 2.6.0-test2-ac2
Why:
Topic is dead, problem over, casual reader spends no more time on it
Example 2:
Subject: Odd O(1) behaviour with SCSI tape and serial PPP
Appropriate top post:
The measurements Jonas requested appear below interspersed with his
questions.
Why:
If you want details you won't miss this post, if you are only
concerned with patches or discussion of root cause you might skip
this one.
A short top post takes the place of the Summary header most folks can't
generate or see. Used properly it's a benefit, used as the examples Thomas
posted it's disgusting.
-- bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 31 2003 - 22:00:24 EST