steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info
Tue Aug 21 05:43:31 CEST 2012
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 22:49:24 +0000, Prasad, Ramit wrote:
>> > I also tend to blame M$ (Outlook and variants) for this tendency to
>> > quote everything and top-post -- Outlook makes it almost impossible
>> > to do a trim&interleave response style.
>> I that Outlook & Co are guilty. That and the fact that few people even
>> think about this.
> Nonsense, I post only from Outlook. You can do it and it is not hard. It
> is just requires a little effort.
> Top posting makes more sense in a corporate setting for a couple
> reasons. Seeing the exact email trail rather than what someone considers
> "relevant" context can be very useful.
That's what your email archive, and the threading information in the
email headers, is for.
When people used to correspond by paper mail, they did not photocopy the
entire past correspondence and staple it to the back of their letter. And
then the person responding didn't photocopy the photocopies and post them
back with his response. If somebody did, that would be stupid -- did he
think the sender posted the originals and didn't keep a copy?
If there was a business requirement to make copies of copies of copies,
people would have done it. But there wasn't, and it was stupid and costly
and so they didn't.
With email, it's less costly, but it's equally stupid. Email programs
reduce the cost of making and posting those photocopies to essentially
zero, at least zero for the person pressing Send.
It might be almost free for the sender, but it's still stupid. Nobody
looks at those deep email trails. When you want to find out the order of
correspondence, you sort your mail folder by Thread or by Date and look
at it there, not by trying to interpret the copies of copies of copies of
past discussions. Nobody uses them. They just bulk up email and get in
the way of communication and make searching for relevant emails harder.
I've had to dig through email archives for legal purposes, looking for
evidence in legal cases, and having to read past copies of copies of
copies of copies (down to ten or twelve levels deep!!!) makes the process
much, much, much harder than it should be.
Top posting in and of itself is not always bad. But the practice of
leaving copies of copies of copies in the body of the email is beyond
stupid. If they were *attachments* that could be ignored when printed,
that would be *almost* sane, but putting them in the body of the email is
> Not to mention that frequently
> corporate email is more like slow instant messaging; I need less context
> (e.g. conversation history) and get all the information I need from
> what the sender is writing.
In my experience, if you ask a question in corporate environments by
email, you're lucky to get an answer within a day. Slow indeed.
More information about the Python-list