Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 16:39:25 +0000 From: Joe Holden <joe@joeholden.co.uk> To: User Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Mail etiquette (was: What is this mean by this term) Message-ID: <45B0F43D.2050602@joeholden.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20070119112918.2612.GERARD@seibercom.net> References: <20070118231254.GA5405@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20070119152124.GE25249@submonkey.net> <20070119112918.2612.GERARD@seibercom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gerard Seibert wrote: > On Friday January 19, 2007 at 10:21:24 (AM) Ceri Davies wrote: > > >> On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 09:42:54AM +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >> >>> I think the biggest problem with Microsoft MUAs is not where they >>> position the cursor, but the difficulty they cause in editing the >>> text. My editor also positions the cursor at the very top when I >>> reply to a message. But it also makes it possible to tidy things up. >> To be fair to Microsoft (or perhaps this makes it even worse), their Mac >> development team clearly understand this, as Entourage (the Mac >> equivalent of Outlook) doesn't do any of the tens of stupid things that >> Outlook does. > > Actually, the MS Live Beta version can be configured to place the cursor > at the end when replying. > >>> "Top posting" is only one issue. Others of great importance are >>> trimming your posts, not breaking the lines into tiny fragments, and >>> not writing one-line paragraphs. Your .sig is a good example of >>> things that people should remove from replies. > > No one needs a 10+ line signature. Perhaps they are compromising for > other shortcomings. >> When they are correctly formatted (line-feed,hyphen,hyphen,space), good >> MUAs can do this automatically. > > I think the problem can be more readily attributed to the theory of > "PEBKC". > There are also patches for Outlook to implement proper quoting and replying. Ta, Joe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45B0F43D.2050602>