[PLUG] Quoting

[Jeme A Brelin]

On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Jeff Schwaber wrote:
> And you, sir, cut my email poorly. The rest of this paragraph stated
> that it was more readable in cases where context mattered little.

Well, that begs the question, why quote AT ALL?  If it's for the very few
people who are going to want to read context AFTER they've read the new
material (the implication is that quoted text after new material doesn't
need to be read), then those people can look at the previous messages in
the thread.

> > > I've seen that fairly rarely (lately), though.
> >
> > Don't know where you've been.  It's pretty much the norm everywhere I
> > read.
>
> I'm referring to this list.

I would say inline quoting is the norm for this list.

See, if the email only has one topic, then bottom-posting IS inline
quoting.  It's the same format, but with one element instead of many.

> I'm going to cut the rest of this email, because it all assumes an
> argument I did not make -- that where context is relevant, you should
> write backwards.

Um, no, the bit about the format of the message conveying meaning was also
cut.  You advocate, in this thread, putting format in the hands of the
reader.  That's a bit like taking an electronic book of poetry and hitting
Select All -> Justify.

> I am making an argument for the context-insensitive reply, where you
> leave some context for those who wish to explore further.

If it's context-insensitive, why would anyone explore further?  Certainly
the thread is publicly available.

> I am also making an argument that the people who are yelling at the
> people top-posting are being ill-behaved, as this list is fairly well
> behaved, and fairly readable, especially considering its high volume.

I find myself re-reading top-posts all the time.  The volume makes the
list so dense that simple top-posts cannot be differentiated by subthread.

> Until you choose to engage me on those points, Jeme, my respect for you,
> which was quite high before this, will be in jeopardy.

I think I did.

> Now I have no wish to discuss the merits of democracy, at least not
> here, but when the polls of internet-savvy users are split nearly 50-50
> on how to quote, I don't think you can easily say that it's not a matter
> of taste. At least, you couldn't if you wanted to make sense.

First, people read from top to bottom.  That's not a matter of preference,
it's how things make sense to us (with the exception of some Inuit people,
if I recall... it's been a while since I've read Ethnomathematics).

Second, a poll can come out 50-50 for lots of reasons other than
preference (though this poll is a ways off even-Steven... and I don't
think either of us are prepared to tell the margin of error on this kind
of unscientific poll).  It could be that people are generally evenly
divided on their learning methods or recall abilities.  It could be that,
as I wrote before, top-posting is just laziness and half the people are
lazy and insensitive to the needs of their readers and half the people
take the time to make it easier for their readers.

You'll note that many more of the arguments for top-posting (in the
comments on that poll) are pretty selfish in nature than those for
bottom-posting:  "I don't need to read a bunch of quoted garbage." or
"I've already read the thread."  So these people top-post because they'd
rather read top-posts.  It's inconsiderate of them to assume that everyone
wants what they want.

The point is that top-posting assumes the context is not necessary, but
that's simply not true for all readers.  In fact, it's not true for about
half the readers (according to that poll).  And as you pointed out,
top-posters aren't out there trying to get bottom-posters to change their
behavior and that's because bottom-posting is less abusive to the reader.
Top-posters don't complain because they have nothing substantial about
which to complain.

In other words, it's easier for the people who think they want top-posting
to deal with bottom-posting than it is for people who want bottom-posting
to deal with top-posting.  The right thing to do is make things as easy on
the reader as possible.

A top-poster is stealing slack.  Their laziness is causing extra effort on
the part of others and therefore harming the others' ability to be lazy
themselves.

J.
-- 
   -----------------
     Jeme A Brelin
    jeme at brelin.net
   -----------------
 [cc] counter-copyright
 http://www.openlaw.org