Basil Chupin wrote:

Mike Dewhirst wrote:

...

Here is an axample of top-posting. So sue me :)

The fact is that we should be pleased this list attracts people who don't know the correct etiquette. IT MEANS (please forgive my shouting) NON-SAVVY PEOPLE ARE USING (trying to use) SuSE! This has been said many times before.

Sorry, but I disagree with the logic of your argument :-) .

There are 2 aspects here: (1) attracting and retaining new SuSE users to this forum, and (2) whether (new) people who come here are posting-etiquette aware.

Basil (1) who cares whether the list attracts and retains new SuSE users? All I care about is that there ARE new SuSE users - on an ongoing basis. However, if they stick around they need to pick up on the netiquette. I agree with you there but see below. (2) the new people we want are from that market sector which dominates. Most of those people never use lists like this. Windows users simply ask each other for help. There are so many of them the majority don't know we exist let alone that a list like this can make it possible for Linux (alright, SuSE Linux) to satisfy our computing requirements. If people from the 90% sector join us we can be almost certain it is the first time they have joined a list. I'm only exaggerating for effect. I know there are lots of Windows users who are list savvy. They don't trigger widespread mail rage. I think the point I'm trying to get across is that Linux (SuSE) needs to infiltrate that vast bulk of the populace who are real newbies. Let's give them a well written and even entertaining set of list guidelines. My original motivation was to suggest that a referral to the guidelines by way of a link would be the polite way to welcome a newbie who trod on toes. Mike

People who come here should already be posting-etiquette aware and if they are not then it does not mean that they are simply new SuSE users. I was once a "newbie" to this forum but I didn't come here ignorant of how to or how not to post/reply to messages in mail lists or newsgroups.

There are people, of course, who either don't know what the posting-etiquette is or who know but deliberately ignore it because they are simply one of the anti-social breed of people. But this does not mean, as you are suggesting, that they are "non-savvy people .. using.. SuSE".

As far as I know, this forum is no different to any other well run, intelligent, forum where the normal posting-etiquette is known and observed by the participants.

Nevertheless, I take your point about having a set of guidelines which one could point a "newbie" at if, and when, they should deviate too far from posting-etiquette.

Unfortunately we do not live in a perfect world and there will always be someone who will not adhere to requested standard of behaviour - take your opening sentence for example - so all one can hope for when arriving at a set of guidelines is that most people will follow them but if they don't then there is no way that one could truly enforce them.

The one real thing going for this forum (and a few others that I subscribe to associated with SuSE generally) is that there don't appear to be any spotty-faced teenagers participating who cannot spell nor put two words together in a sentence and whose problems and hardware etc are always of the fornicating kind or of some other bodily function.

...

Sure we need a protocol. Someone ought to write one and post it wherever people sign up for this list. Then it would be easy to refer a hijacker or otherwise uneducated beginner to that well written and politely encouraging post.

I think it is important to help newbies rather than repel them. If you (oldies) want to depend on SuSE indefinitely it must grow in popularity.

Things never stay the same. SuSE's popularity can either grow or shrink. If it shrinks I have to switch my allegiance to another distro which I can rely on to retain critical mass and continue indefinitely.

Mail rage is repulsive.

Mike

Dana J. Laude wrote:

...

On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 20:31 -0700, jdow wrote:

...

Seems to me you men are hijacking a thread yourself. You are very bad men. Retire your selves to a corner and sit there for an hour contemplating your sin.

{^_-} Joanne, being 1) obnoxious, 2) silly, or 3) observant.

Seems to me that top quoting isn't good either. WTF, this list was not so unclued before. Seriously though, a few of the latest threads have been pretty lame. (unsubscribe from SLE as an example)

Let's just get back to support issues / questions and get along. (putting on flame suit) ;)

Dana

Cheers.

Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2006 15:24 schrieb Peter Sutter:

[...] I agree with you, but we should be even more tolerant to newcomers and ignorants.

you're so right! On the other hand I can understand, if somebody looses his nerves from time to time and just wants to vent his anger...

[...]

These newcomers need all the support we can give. Most of them have never subscribed to a mailing list before, so they would not know about 'netiquette'; but all of them are keen to adapt and learn. If they make mistakes like top posting or try to unsubscribe in an unsuitable way, we can tell them in a polite way; and they will learn.

[...]

We have to ask ourselves why people want to unsubscribe from this list? Why would anyone unsubscribe? I can't imagine they are doing it because they know too much about SuSE Linux, but here are some reasons I can think off why they want to:

Because they moved back to windows because they could not handle Linux Because they could not get the answers here Because they moved to another distro Because they got peed off by the sometimes abusive comments and answers

[...] It can also be because filtering messages and ordering them in a threaded way seems to be a problem for many that have never seen/done this before. My Eudora on my old Win98 PC isn't even able to show a folder in threaded view and it cannot reply to a list. If you suffer from an email client like that

So very true. Opensuse was my first subscription, this list my second, I knew *nothing* about mailing lists before. Thanks to polite people here I've learned a lot - and still am learning :-) the many mails from such a list can easily outgrow. To me this was such a huge problem in the beginning that I almost unsubscribed... Daniel -- Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Switzerland professional photography: http://www.daniel-bauer.com Madagascar special: http://www.sanic.ch

* Orn E. Hansen (orn_hansen@thalamus.nu) [20060810 23:18]:

Top post is "ok" in cases, where you aren't answering to anything specific

IMNSHO, top posting is *never* OK, like reading a book back to front is in most cases nonsense. Philipp

* Daniel Bauer [08-11-06 11:09]:

I'd replace *never* by *in most cases not*. When buying a book I first look at the back of it for a summary of it's contents (and yes: the price).

*never*

If somebody top posts "thanks, this was the solution" it can be quite a help to identify the mail that contains the solution (and not the discussion to find it).

a two or three line quote with the 'thanks' below achieves your intent and still follows acceptable protocol

Just my 2cents...

My 3 cents, raise you and call -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2

Not all people / languages / logic is top down, left to right, front to back..... When I see a post that I know the answer to, and it is quick and simple, I top post it. When I ask a question, I like to see the answer, not my question again, I already know what I'm asking. Search the archives and relegate me to your /dev/null, as I have my own opinion and am not afraid to stand up for my beliefs. B-) On Friday 11 August 2006 8:43 am, Philipp Thomas wrote:

* Orn E. Hansen (orn_hansen@thalamus.nu) [20060810 23:18]:

...

Top post is "ok" in cases, where you aren't answering to anything specific

IMNSHO, top posting is *never* OK, like reading a book back to front is in most cases nonsense.

Philipp

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

On Friday 11 August 2006 9:14 am, Philipp Thomas wrote:

Isn't that just a wee bit selfish? Normally you're not the only participant of a given mailing list, so there are probably quite a few other people that do *not* know you're question. Besides: never heard of sensible quoting?

I don't think so, (search the archives, I stated this before) because if they didn't know the question, it is still in the answerd email, below the answer. When you search the archives, and see in the results the answer right there first, it is for everyone that follows benefit. It is much easier for me when searching to see the answers on top for the previous email. My client does threading nicely, and this is easier. Understand that I'm not saying that it is better. I'm saying that like for my opinions, I don't expect everyone else to have the same. I think your opinion is just as valid as mine. And that seems to be the crux of the arguement. I think your opinion is valid, regardless of whether it is the same as mine. You regard my opinion as invalid, becuase it is different than yours. Your opinion leaves no room for people who think for themselves, or for any change whatsoever. It is interesting that most of the policed discussions always end up, when confronted with individual thinking and logic, back to "this is the way the list has been, and is what is expected, therefore, do it just because...". I've always thought it odd that a list for technology that is "open" could be so "closed". B-)

On Friday 11 August 2006 9:38 am, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

and your next statement is where your reasoning fails:

...

You regard my opinion as invalid, becuase it is different than yours.

because this is *only* your *assumption*!

I'd go so far as to say this is my opinion, or belief, but the more I think about it, I'd have to say that I didn't give the benifit of the doubt. I like to always give the benefit of the doubt, so my apologies for that. More accurate would have been, "I feel like my opinion isn't considered, because it is different then what is supposedly the standard practice"

...

Your opinion leaves no room for people who think for themselves, or for any change whatsoever.

more assumption, or *only* your opinion

definately my opinion, based on experience, mainly from you and Ken..... and again, without the benefit of the doubt. hehehe So, apoligies, and "It feels like my opinion isn't considered, because it doesnt follow what is supposedly the standard practice"

...

It is interesting that most of the policed discussions always end up, when confronted with individual thinking and logic, back to "this is the way the list has been, and is what is expected, therefore, do it just because...".

and you have pulled this out of who-knows-where (rather than stating the real location) because it was not in the list of reasons presented.

LOL Instead of searching for past posts to show this, Ken was nice enough to offer up EXACLTY this example with his reply. Thanks Ken.

...

I've always thought it odd that a list for technology that is "open" could be so "closed".

more opinion

Absolutely! My whole email is/was opinion. Being opinionated doesn't preclude one from being openminded, however, most poeple assume that opinionated people aren't open minded. I like to think of them as experienced, with something to offer. The mere facts that they are willing to listen, and allow me to have my own opinion (agree to disagree), and can discuss the topic without angst, defensiveness, or getting into a power struggle, makes them open minded. When a discussion about a topic is relegated to, "Well, just do it because it is how it has been done in the past, and how we want it done now", it looses the chance for growth / understanding. B-)

On Friday 11 August 2006 11:04 am, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

No argument. I don't believe that you have been denied you opinion. I don't believe that you would have felt slighted, had they tried.

Well, to give credit where credit is due, after our long discussions when I first came to this list, I haven't been "policed" when I top post much longer. Whether that is because I've been /dev/null 'd or not, who knows, but YOU certainly have backed off of me, and it is appreciated.

...

When a discussion about a topic is relegated to, "Well, just do it because it is how it has been done in the past, and how we want it done now", it looses the chance for growth / understanding.

No, Philipp presented substantiated *reasons*.

And therefore, logically, one could assertain that it wasn't him that I was speaking to. This in general is where (in my opinion) the majority of formatting discussions end up. And that is what I was speaking to.

Again, the list is open, but the administration, which also bears the cost, is not, so standards are to be accepted.

For me it is a matter of Respect, efficiency, ease of use, and personal gain all combined. I wouldn't say selfishness (phillip's term) over pesonal gain. When I help someone else, ultimately it is for my own personal gain. Whether for the feel good "I helped somebody", the carma plan, or both, it is different from selfishness, because the distinction is that selfishness is to the exclusion of regard for others. If someone has the answer to my question, by all means, make it easy for yourself and me by top posting the quick answer. If it involves more explination, or review of quoted text, or break down to specific points, by all means interject your text with the OP's. If your reply doesn't speak to, or need to reference past text, trim them out. My point is to not badger people who are logically making choices and thinking for themselves and taking things on a case by case basis, with respect for others and efficiency, just because it isn't considered the 'norm'. Hell, if I'm in a store, and someone is about to make a bad, un-educated choice, that I believe they'll regret, and I have the ability to help, but not the time, I might do something un-conventional. Instead of introducing myself, and going about it in the way that would be expected, or the 'norm', I may just walk by and say something that will enable the customer to have a chance at learning what they're missing. A word or distinction that enables them to ask the right questions, get what they need to know, and benifit. I don't think I'll even speak to the "do it my way because I paid for it". I would concider it the same tactic of, "this is what has been done in the past, so do it now". Oh, and even though I speak these ideals here, I still reserve my right to tell my son, "Because I said so!". heheh B-)

Noting your disagreement, your expected compliance will most certainly be appreciated.

-- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:43:39 +0200, Philipp Thomas wrote:

* Orn E. Hansen (orn_hansen@thalamus.nu) [20060810 23:18]:

...

Top post is "ok" in cases, where you aren't answering to anything specific

IMNSHO, top posting is *never* OK, like reading a book back to front is in most cases nonsense.

It's not ok very often, but never say never. :) When somebody "me too!"s - and there are good reasons to do that, sometimes - there's really no harm in the response being on top. In fact, I think it's better put it on top than to pedantically follow the post-at-the-bottom rule without understanding why and when it's worth following. It's true that top posting can be pretty inconvenient to people who use archaic mailers [0], but I'd argue that those archaic mailers are pretty inconvenient anyway. On the other hand, mails with lines of more than 80 characters (except when they include literal output) have no excuse. :) [0] The official definition of an archaic mailer, that I'm making up as I write this, is one that doesn't thread mails. -- Je suis en train d'être dans un train.

It's singularly amazing how much spare time these anal retentive types are about simple email that is easy enough for a human of average intelligence to figure out, read, and deal with. The only "right way" to format email involves making a simple effort not to obfuscate. If course, it's more fun to demand machine perfect email formatting and waste time bitching about it like a bunch of crotchety old men babbling about their lumbago because they have nothing else to do. Meanwhile they're wasting more time on perfect formatting than they save if the email is perfectly formatted. {^_-} Joanne ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad Bourn" me too! (couldn't resist) B-) On Friday 11 August 2006 10:54 am, Michael Wolf wrote:

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:43:39 +0200, Philipp Thomas wrote:

...

* Orn E. Hansen (orn_hansen@thalamus.nu) [20060810 23:18]:

...

Top post is "ok" in cases, where you aren't answering to anything specific

IMNSHO, top posting is *never* OK, like reading a book back to front is in most cases nonsense.

It's not ok very often, but never say never. :)

When somebody "me too!"s - and there are good reasons to do that, sometimes - there's really no harm in the response being on top. In fact, I think it's better put it on top than to pedantically follow the post-at-the-bottom rule without understanding why and when it's worth following.

It's true that top posting can be pretty inconvenient to people who use archaic mailers [0], but I'd argue that those archaic mailers are pretty inconvenient anyway.

On the other hand, mails with lines of more than 80 characters (except when they include literal output) have no excuse. :)

[0] The official definition of an archaic mailer, that I'm making up as I write this, is one that doesn't thread mails.

-- Je suis en train d'être dans un train.

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

When somebody "me too!"s - and there are good reasons to do that, sometimes - there's really no harm in the response being on top. In fact, I think it's better put it on top than to pedantically follow the post-at-the-bottom rule without understanding why and when it's worth following. <SNIP> IMHO me too or thanks are more personal responses best left off list and sent to the author of the email your responding to. As to newbies they need careful attention and positive reinforsement as you would to make a sale. Even though we could all truthfully talk of windows faults and

On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 11:54 -0500, Michael Wolf wrote: <SNIP> the likelyhood of it not comming out until 2008, that is still talking negative which is not what a customer needs. For me a simple demo and the idea of so much software in a package cheaply or free was enough but I had a CS degree so I did not need as much hand holding. I did still need help with the early installs and local linux groups are most important in this getting people up and running until they are ready to blow their magic 8 installs on their own. I did my eight in one weekend, decided the disks were bad and bouthe 8.2 and all was good. Personally I find the whole top posting vs bottom posting to be tiresome. Sometimes I ask a question in a thread and the only response I get is the tiresome rant about top posting. Not good for sales. -- ___ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ | | | | [__ | | | |___ |_|_| ___] | \/