Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (1695 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse] Re: Re: Beagle frontend
- From: Dan Goodman <dan.goodman@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:32:21 -0400
- Message-id: <4A5DF685.5090504@xxxxxxxx>
Heinz Diehl wrote:
that English isn't a first language for everyone, so I just overlook it.
I am more concerned with substance than style. :-)
But, having been personally flamed for having done something similar
recently, I am curious as to whether or not it (fullquoting when adding
a short bottom-post) is really an issue to most people, or just to a couple.
And I am talking about 75-150 lines max, not 1000.
Personally, I don't always have time to read everything that is here,
and I'd rather have to scan through a bit I don't need, in order to get
the context, than to have to trace back through the thread.
After all, you can get to the bottom with a either a single mouse move
or a short sequence of the same Page keystroke -- don't even have to
count how many...just do a few and you are at the bottom. For me, the
space bar will get me to the bottom in a fraction of a second.
So is it really an issue, or just another way to do a "tat" in response
to a "tit-for-tat"?
After all, there is no objective or algorithmic method for conclusively
determining what is relevant and what is not. So why not just leave a
couple of pages there?
I remember when download speeds were 30bps. And when a 10Mb hard drive
was a big improvement. In those days, brevity was well worth the time it
took. Today, time is in short supply for most people, and where simple
work-arounds exist, neither storage or download should ever be an issue
in a message of well under 10,000 characters.
So why should we take the time to trim a relatively small bit of text?
Just curious to find out if I am in fact out of step with the sentiment
of the group, or if such nit-picking is considered the best way to
maintain the readability of the list for the average reader?
Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain confidential or
proprietary information to be conveyed solely for the intended recipient(s). If
you are not the intended recipient, or if you otherwise received this message
in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly
delete this e-mail, including attachments, without reading or saving them in
any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction
of this e-mail, including attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
On 15.07.2009, Peter Nikolic wrote:And you shalt use correct grammar when writing, but frankly, I recognize
...what shall i do...
You shall not fullquote just for to add 2 lines :-)
...
that English isn't a first language for everyone, so I just overlook it.
I am more concerned with substance than style. :-)
But, having been personally flamed for having done something similar
recently, I am curious as to whether or not it (fullquoting when adding
a short bottom-post) is really an issue to most people, or just to a couple.
And I am talking about 75-150 lines max, not 1000.
Personally, I don't always have time to read everything that is here,
and I'd rather have to scan through a bit I don't need, in order to get
the context, than to have to trace back through the thread.
After all, you can get to the bottom with a either a single mouse move
or a short sequence of the same Page keystroke -- don't even have to
count how many...just do a few and you are at the bottom. For me, the
space bar will get me to the bottom in a fraction of a second.
So is it really an issue, or just another way to do a "tat" in response
to a "tit-for-tat"?
After all, there is no objective or algorithmic method for conclusively
determining what is relevant and what is not. So why not just leave a
couple of pages there?
I remember when download speeds were 30bps. And when a 10Mb hard drive
was a big improvement. In those days, brevity was well worth the time it
took. Today, time is in short supply for most people, and where simple
work-arounds exist, neither storage or download should ever be an issue
in a message of well under 10,000 characters.
So why should we take the time to trim a relatively small bit of text?
Just curious to find out if I am in fact out of step with the sentiment
of the group, or if such nit-picking is considered the best way to
maintain the readability of the list for the average reader?
Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain confidential or
proprietary information to be conveyed solely for the intended recipient(s). If
you are not the intended recipient, or if you otherwise received this message
in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly
delete this e-mail, including attachments, without reading or saving them in
any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction
of this e-mail, including attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |