Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (1695 mails)

["Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In <4A5DF685.5090504@xxxxxxxx>, Dan Goodman wrote:
> [H]aving 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.

If you message is more than 80% quoted text and attribution, you haven't 
trimmed enough.  You should provide just enough context for users not to be 
confused about your meaning or the meaning of the quoted text.  The older 
messages should have already been delivered to them and be available in the 
public archives.

80% is a guideline I heard somewhere and adopted, but it seems to work 
fairly well and is quite generous.

> So why should we take the time to trim a relatively small bit of text?

You should do this because it is polite, and not everyone is "lucky" enough 
be using the same email setup you have.  Plus, trimming shouldn't take 
significantly longer than reading the email again.  We should cater to the 
varied needs of others on this list, since there are more of "them" then 
there are of "me".  If I spend 30 seconds extra but it saves each reader of 
this list 1 second, the list as a whole has saved time.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                   ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy         `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/                    \_/