Re: Agent 6 Hide Quoted Text worth the upgrade
Rich Webb
>I know what the post was about. I just want to see the responses.
I like it. Set now for "last 10 lines." Works great for 100-line
messages where there's a four line response and the author couldn't be
bothered to edit the preceding quoted material.
>Since everyone thinks top posting is wrong.
It's not wrong, it's EVIL! ;-)
--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA
(PeteCresswell)
>Since everyone thinks top posting is wrong.
Maybe 99.9% think it's wrong, but I'd much rather read a
top-posted post instead of a 100-line quote followed by a single
line of text.
Snipping/inserting is the optimal, but so few do it and so many
quote the entire message that I'll give top posting the nod.
--
PeteCresswell
Ken Blake
wrote:
> Per Ken1943:
> >Since everyone thinks top posting is wrong.
>
> Maybe 99.9% think it's wrong, but I'd much rather read a
> top-posted post instead of a 100-line quote followed by a single
> line of text.
In my view, both are very bad, but top posting is worse. In *both*
cases, I need to scroll to the bottom of the message to see what is
being replied to (and the reply, with bottom-posting), but in top
posting I then have to scroll *back* up to the top to read the reply.
> Snipping/inserting is the optimal,
We agree completely here.
> but so few do it and so many
> quote the entire message
Alas!
> that I'll give top posting the nod.
I understand your point of view (many people agree with you), but I
disagree, for the reason above
--
Ken Blake
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Nicetameetya
[Default] On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:31:07 -0600, Agent1999
<Nom...@UseGroup.invalid> declared to all and sundry:
>In alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent, Marc Wilson wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Well, I won't go that far, but bottom-posting without editing is almost
>>as bad.
>
>Top-posting with editing is very rare.
Thankfully, so is top-posting. In fact, the only times I see
top-posting in any of the ng's I regularly monitor is from newbies or
trolls.
OTOH some stubborn, lazy posters still neglect to snip before adding
their sentence or two at the end.
Ken Blake
<gd...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> [Default] On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:31:07 -0600, Agent1999
> <Nom...@UseGroup.invalid> declared to all and sundry:
>
> >In alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent, Marc Wilson wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>Well, I won't go that far, but bottom-posting without editing is almost
> >>as bad.
> >
> >Top-posting with editing is very rare.
>
> Thankfully, so is top-posting. In fact, the only times I see
> top-posting in any of the ng's I regularly monitor is from newbies or
> trolls.
Then you apparently don't frequent Microsoft newsgroups. Top-posting
is the most common way people there post, even those who are neither
newbies nor trolls.
(PeteCresswell)
>I know what the post was about. I just want to see the responses.
I just bought the upgrade - based solely on that feature.
--
PeteCresswell
Nicetameetya
[Default] On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:33:40 -0700, Ken Blake
<kbl...@this.is.an.invalid.domain> declared to all and sundry:
Not any more, but I've just checked a few of the longer threads in
last year's archive of "microsoft.public.expression.webdesigner" and
another MS tech group and found it's about half-and-half.
Since top-posting appears to be the industry standard for email
exchanges between customers and technical support teams, top-posting
in an technical help ng isn't that surprising. But in other, more
general tech ng's - including this one - top-posting is more rare ...
thankfully.
--
"No problem at all. Just scroll down to the bottom of the page and
read backwards."
"Only thing is ... I forgot where we started."
"Maybe they don't know how."
"I wonder why so few of the others top-post?"
"That's nice."
"I'm a top-poster too."
"Yes."
"Are you a top-poster?"
"Hi."
"Hi."
A conversation between two top-posters:
Bob S
> I just bought the upgrade - based solely on that feature.
Same here
--
Bob S.
Mark Lloyd
wrote:
>In alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent, ((PeteCresswell)) wrote in
><regdg5pqrg61kvcpg...@4ax.com>::
>
>>Per Ken1943:
>>>Since everyone thinks top posting is wrong.
>>
>>Maybe 99.9% think it's wrong,
>
>If only :)
>
>>..but I'd much rather read a
>>top-posted post instead of a 100-line quote followed by a single
>>line of text.
>
>Well, I won't go that far, but bottom-posting without editing is almost
>as bad.
>
WORSE. While I prefer bottom-posting (WITH appropriate snips),
top-posting is still better than having a reply after a 200-line
quote.
>>Snipping/inserting is the optimal, but so few do it and so many
>>quote the entire message that I'll give top posting the nod.
--
34 days until the winter solstice celebration
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us
"How could you ask me to believe in God when there's
absolutely no evidence that I can see?" -- Jodie Foster
nos...@nospam.invalid
Mark Lloyd <mll...@notstupid.isus.invalid> wrote:
> While I prefer bottom-posting (WITH appropriate snips),
> top-posting is still better than having a reply after a 200-line
> quote.
But don't you still have to scroll down to the bottom to see what
the person was replying to?
h...@h-gee.co.uk
Generally the header will tell you this and you have probably been following it
for a few posts before you reply or if you are the first then there probably
won't be 200 lines to quote.
Sir Hugh of Bognor
--
I used to be an Egotistical Megalamaniac - but now I'm just perfect!
Hugh Gundersen
h...@h-gee.co.uk
Get AVG Internet Protection
AVG Reseller <sa...@bognor-bill.com>
discounted software - renewals and upgrades
Bognor Regis, W.Sussex, England, UK
Ken Blake
Yes, if what he is replying to was bottom-posted. And then back up to
see what the reply was. Scrolling twice is worse than scrolling once.
Mark Lloyd
Why? It's in a previous message. I read it there.
Mark Lloyd
Read the messages in order. No scrolling needed with top-posted reply.
Ken Blake
<mll...@notstupid.isus.invalid> wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:59:37 -0700, Ken Blake
> <kbl...@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:31:53 -0600, nos...@nospam.invalid wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 11/21/09, at 8:07:12AM,
> >> Mark Lloyd <mll...@notstupid.isus.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> > While I prefer bottom-posting (WITH appropriate snips),
> >> > top-posting is still better than having a reply after a 200-line
> >> > quote.
> >>
> >>
> >> But don't you still have to scroll down to the bottom to see what
> >> the person was replying to?
> >
> >
> >Yes, if what he is replying to was bottom-posted. And then back up to
> >see what the reply was. Scrolling twice is worse than scrolling once.
>
> Read the messages in order. No scrolling needed with top-posted reply.
Not true, at least not for me. I have Agent set to show me only unread
messages. Showing me all of them would at least double how long it
took me to go through what's been posted in a newsgroup.
So when I read a message I very often don't have any previous messages
in the thread to read, nor do I want to read previous messages in the
thread.
So to me, each message needs to stand by itself, and be intelligible
by itself. What was previously posted in other messages is irrelevant,
as far as I'm concerned.
And I'll add one other point: if you think that one should get his
information about what has been previously posted by reading previous
messages in the thread, then you should also think that quoting is
completely unnecessary, and the whole question of top-posting vs.
bottom-posting vanishes.
Mark Lloyd
wrote:
[snip]
>>
>>Read the messages in order. No scrolling needed with top-posted reply.
>
>*IF*
>
>1) You have all the messages.
>2) They're in order.
>
In MOST cases, the preceding are true for a message. With the few
exceptions, you do need to read the quote. Compare that to requiring
scrolling EVERY time (bottom-posted reply, no snipping, no "hide
quoted text").
>There are still occasional propagation issues on usenet- not least
>because there are still some people out there who can't get DSL and only
>upload/download occasionally.
>
Yes, there are. That's "occasional" rather than "almost always".
BTW, I can't get DSL here. I can (and do) get cable internet, which is
better.
>Sometimes Agent doesn't thread things in quite the way I'd expect-
>possibly because other people's newsreaders are not referencing properly
>(I've never been arsed enough to investigate it).
>
In one group, I see a few messages from 2006 sorted ahead of current
messages (and they're supposed to be in date order).
>You should *never* assume that (continued from previous message) is
>sufficient- there should be enough quoted text for context.
I never ASSUME it. That doesn't mean I fail to notice the majority of
cases when it is there.
> In fact,
>I'd love a filter that would allow any post/main with "RE:" or "FW:" in
>the subject and no quoted text to be deleted unread- by definition, it's
>from a stupid person.
Probably, but it could contain desirable content. Stupidity doesn't
have to mean 100%. I might still filter something like that, if stupid
posts become a problem. I do filter Googlegroups posts.
--
33 days until the winter solstice celebration
The Horny Goat
<sne...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>When I asked someone a week ago why he had to send a "Me too" post 2743
>lines long, there was a plalce revolution amongst in the list.
I agree - anybody that would do that deserves to be slowly roasted on
a spit, dipped in honey and fed to the red ants!
The Horny Goat
>Except that no one found it to be wrong not to snip.
>Those who remarked told me to get with the times.
I suppose it is wrong to defecate in the streets but no one ever
taught me different so it must be OK!
Nicetameetya
[Default] On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:14:50 -0800, The Horny Goat
<lcr...@home.ca> declared to all and sundry:
Excellent!. I've never seen it expressed so graphically ... yet so
succinctly.
Nicetameetya
[Default] On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:04:11 +0000, Jim Higgins
<inv...@invalid.invalid> declared to all and sundry:
>Here's my favorite...
>
>"Posting at the top because that's where the cursor happened to
>be is like shitting in your pants because that's where your
>asshole happened to be." -- Andreas Prilop (c.i.w.a.h)
Great! That has gone straight into my Signatures folder.
Boris Mohar
>I know what the post was about. I just want to see the responses.
>Since everyone thinks top posting is wrong.
>
>
>Ken1943
I wish it was part of the folder properties. All or nothing is clumsy.
--
Boris
awillia...@charter.net.invalid
<mll...@notstupid.isus.invalid> wrote:
>Read the messages in order. No scrolling needed with top-posted reply.
How do you have your quote features set? I have 0 and 3.
~*~*~*Amy mailto:awillia...@charter.net~*~*~
Save a Tree, Save our Planet, Recycle, Think Organic
________________________________
Thought of the day:
The closest we come to perfection is in our resumes.
gromit
alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent
Ken1943 <ken...@no295no.net> posted:
>I know what the post was about. I just want to see the responses.
>Since everyone thinks top posting is wrong.
After a couple of months away from usenet, I read up on the additions
in 6.0 and decided to go for it based on this feature. It has made my
newsgroup reading a pleasure again :o)
I much prefer usenet instead of http for reading text.
--
Phil
Perth Western Australia
To reply delete "NOTHANKS"
gromit
alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent
Ian Anderson <an...@127.0.0.1.invalid> posted:
[snip]
>Welcome back to Agent.
I never left Agent just that I hadn't had time for usenet in the
recent past. The email from Forte re: v6 prompted me into action and I
now use it to access my Gmail a/c, so it's good to do it all with
Agent once again :o)
--
Phil
To reply delete "NOTHANKS"
Damaeus
<kbl...@this.is.an.invalid.domain> posted on Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:58:58
-0700 the following:
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:38:46 -0600, Mark Lloyd
> <mll...@notstupid.isus.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Read the messages in order. No scrolling needed with top-posted reply.
>
> Not true, at least not for me. I have Agent set to show me only unread
> messages. Showing me all of them would at least double how long it took
> me to go through what's been posted in a newsgroup.
It'd be nice if there was a way to make a view that shows unread messages,
but also the two or three unread messages preceding the read messages, if
the message is inside a thread. If all I see is unread messages, and I
mark all my messages read, then I can't see the replies to my own messages
as easily. But I don't always want to leave all my own messages unread,
either.
Also, I can't fit any more message views in Agent. :( How odd to have
such a limit when I have two gigabytes of memory and a 320 GB hard drive.
Damaeus
--
"Marijuana leads to homosexuality ... and therefore to AIDS."
White House Drug Czar Carlton Turner 1986
Cindy Ross
>but also the two or three unread messages preceding the read messages, if
>the message is inside a thread. If all I see is unread messages, and I
>mark all my messages read, then I can't see the replies to my own messages
>as easily. But I don't always want to leave all my own messages unread,
>either.
It's not exactly what you are asking for, but you might find the
"Show complete threads for matching messages" checkbox useful.