Re: [sage-devel] Re: GPL Mathematica clone (written in Java)
Tom Boothby
I'm replying to sage-flame because this thread spiraling off-topic,
and getting rude too. Also, top-posting FTW.
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
<david....@onetel.net> wrote:
>
> I do have a forename. I'd appreciate if you used it.
>
> --
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>
> Dave
Bill Hart
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-flame" group.
> To post to this group, send email to sage-...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-flame+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-flame?hl=en.
>
>
Tom Boothby
get ugly. :D
Bill Hart
rjf
Top posting makes sense to me in the following context.
1. Person A writes a note. nA
2. Person B writes a response. nB
3. Person C writes a response to B, nC. etc.
Then a subsequent reader can see
nA
nB
.. nA, indented or marked somehow, follows, but can be skipped.
nC
.. nB, ignored
.. nA, ignored.
Whereas with bottom posting the reader sees this
nA
..nA indented. Must be scrolled through, at least on some email
readers, to see the next portion
nB
..nA indented. Must be scrolled through..
..nB indented. Must be scrolled through..
nC
This is more work, (again, depending on your reader software), and
longer.
Posting "in the middle" also makes sense, too, but what I also do is
delete stuff, rather than quote it, if it is something that I am not
responding to at all, and it is not necessary as context.
As for referring to Dr. David Kirkby by name,
The AP (Associated Press) Style , see
http://cubreporters.org/AP_Style
says
1. Use a person's full name and title the first time you mention him
or her in an article. For example, write Don Swanson, professor of
communication, not Prof. Swanson. Once people have been fully
identified, refer to them by last name only. There are exceptions, so
always check the AP stylebook.
Given the context of a reply in the discussion, it seems somewhat
redundant to fully identify DK in MY first mention, since the first
mention was waay earlier in the thread.
I'm not sure that this was the rude part, though.
.. Herr Doktor Professor (Emeritus) Richard Fateman PhD. KJ6BIH
PS. If there is truly interest in the story of Wolfram Research
threatening me wrt "MockMMA", I think there is some account of it
online; at least some discussion from people who (while not lawyers)
are familiar with the issues.
see for example,
Who owns Sin, Tan, Expand
at
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math.symbolic/browse_frm/thread/69f1c7a17566d2ac?scoring=d&
and there are probably other places, too.
Bill Hart
response is far more important and considered than the blundering
pages of writing that the person you are responding to has written.
Invariably threads without top posting look like this:
>>>> Completely stupid, illogical, dumbass claim, expanded on in full over some pages in a bumbling self-contradictory way.
>>> What are you talking about you fool, it's obvious that blah. That disproves everything you just said, and everything you wrote below too!
>> Oh wait, maybe I made a mistake. But isn't it true that blah.
> No. See outside your shut eyelids.
Oh, sorry for the noise. I'm an idiot. I had my eyes closed whilst posting.
------
I know which I prefer.
Bill.
Harald Schilly
On Friday, April 22, 2011 7:40:47 PM UTC+2, Bill Hart wrote:
>>>> Completely stupid, illogical, dumbass claim, expanded on in full over some pages in a bumbling self-contradictory way.
>>> What are you talking about you fool, it's obvious that blah. That disproves everything you just said, and everything you wrote below too!
>> Oh wait, maybe I made a mistake. But isn't it true that blah.
> No. See outside your shut eyelids.
Oh, sorry for the noise. I'm an idiot. I had my eyes closed whilst posting.