META: Quoting styles Michael S. Schiffer wrote: > It might not be a bad idea for the list to settle on a standard for quoting > previous articles. (Such a standard could even go into an FAQ for the > list, as and when.) I personally like Usenet-style quoting, where > responses immediately follow the points they're responding to and > extraneous material gets snipped. (I think it makes for a more > conversational style.) But many people like the "quote the whole thing and > insert responses at the top" (which some e-mail programs encourage). At > this point, I think a majority of people here are doing the first, but a > noticeable minority are doing the second. I think exchanges go more > smoothly if everyone (or at least most people) are following the same > standard-- otherwise, in long exchanges, you wind up with posts where you > can't tell who said what, or in what order. Just a thought. > > Mike > >

Michael S. Schiffer wrote:
> It might not be a bad idea for the list to settle on a standard for quoting 
> previous articles.  (Such a standard could even go into an FAQ for the 
> list, as and when.)  I personally like Usenet-style quoting, where 
> responses immediately follow the points they're responding to and 
> extraneous material gets snipped.  (I think it makes for a more 
> conversational style.) 

I completely agree. Particularly the snipping. If it's not directly
relevant to what you're replying to, _please_ don't include it in your
reply. Reading the list takes quite enough time as it is already,
without having to scan over irrelevant material and being forced to
scroll down just for reading a few lines of reply.

May you always find shade and water,
Sander