![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Jeopardy
The war against Jeopardy-style posting is lost, and has been for a long time. I've only come around to realizing this lately.
I bet that the only people who don't do it are people who still post to Usenet, a set also expressable as people who know what "Jeopardy-style posting" means.
I don't mind, and I still write my replies "correctly" because it's better that way. But I have to accept that nobody will pick up on my example.
I bet that the only people who don't do it are people who still post to Usenet, a set also expressable as people who know what "Jeopardy-style posting" means.
I don't mind, and I still write my replies "correctly" because it's better that way. But I have to accept that nobody will pick up on my example.
no subject
> What's wrong with bottom-quoting?
I blame Google for caving in to Outlook. Stupid default behaviors. But what we *really* need is intelligent handling of quoted text, so that it can be parsed out and put wherever the *reader* needs it to go so that they can understand it. Honestly it's pretty annoying scrolling to the bottom of a huge, multi-quoted email to find the bit that's relevant to me, and around here, people just leave the last 1000 replies attached as some sort of vestigial tail. I've gotten emails that included quote-tails in which neither I *nor* the sender participated, him and I having been cced into the conversation and not bothered to trim the excess. So annoying, and sometimes harmful. ("Hey, Bob, you should answer this email from our annoying customer!" Oops.)