| gabriel rosenkoetter on 17 Jun 2004 05:56:02 -0000 |
|
On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 01:38:46AM -0400, kaze wrote: > I find this very interesting and have thought about it before: > top-post -vs- bottom-post, > Microsoft OutLook -vs- "traditional MUAs" > forcing users to adapt to the tool -vs- more flexible tools > FOSS -vs- the non-FOSS model I think your parallelism broke down on the last itme there based on the rest of your email (as in, it should be the other way 'round). But it's NOT really the "FOSS" model. bottom-replies is what Eudora does... or, at least, what it used to do, when I used it on Mac OS 7.x. It's what Pine used to do before Outlook existed (but Pine's changed now, for the worse). It's what all Usenet readers I've ever used do. I *think* that even Novell defaults to bottom-replies, but don't quote me on it. > It is actually difficult to get OutLook to behave in a > simple intuitive manner. I find almost all corporate / OutLook users > top-post - and I top-post right along with them as many don't know anything > else and will actually not see your reply otherwise. I opt to use Mutt (via IMAP/SSL against an Exchange server) and do both. That is, I set mutt to put the signature above the quoting, then copy and reply to the relevant sections. I *only* did this because a certain corporate environment--read, the CTO--preferred top replies (because it was what he was used to; this isn't something you argue with a CxO). > You end up numbering your points and then using the number in the replies, I've seen that. It's absurd. > or worse yet dumping the whole thing into a Word doc and attaching > that to an email that says see attached. There's a step before that that Outlook also encourages: colored text, via HTML dependent emails. Of course, since Outlook is standards "compliant" it sends a plain text part... with the same text and no indication of quotoed vs. new material. Lovely. > My next rant item is people not using relevant subject lines, ... which may well end up getting filtered for me. (Hint: subject of "Hello" gets you 2.5 points to my 4.1 point spam threshold. I really don't have much pity for you if that happens.) > leaving blank subjects, ... but we've all done that, by accident. So I have pity for that one. > not changing the subject as the thread changes, Touchy point: to keep or remove the In-Reply-To: header. (I remove it, on behalf of threaded mail/news readers.) > and replying to the last email you sent cause they can't seem to > compose a new email and actually address it. I'm Not A Fan of that one either. -- gabriel rosenkoetter gr@eclipsed.net Attachment:
pgpaKIrJDXIq8.pgp
|
|