[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: syntaxic shugar proposition : generic do block [OT]
- From: askok@...
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:18:59 +0200
You are Right.
My apologies, and just ignore the rant I made. No rants
should ever be sent in a haste.
The ground reason was using webmail; my mail client is
okay, happy, and does support threads.
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 04:32:14 -0500
Glenn Maynard <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 11:18:02AM +0200,
PLEASE don't cut out essential information when quoting.
The last two messages are not containing what exactly
the "generic do block" suggestion, in short. I tried
hunt that message down, in vain (details don't matter).
Keeping essential details within a mail thread is imho
good manners, and helpful. Isn't it? :)
There was nothing wrong with his quoting; it was done
only the immediate context of his reply and nothing
more. Your reply
was done poorly by contrast: top-posted, with three
whole mails nested
and no attempt at only keeping the needed quotes.
Quotes should not
keep the entire thread logged, but just enough to give
context to the
reply (as I've done here).
You don't trace back a conversation through quotes, you
do that with
threading. If your mailer doesn't thread for you, it's
time to get a
better one; it's an important feature for any mailing