Re: Does TB have a jrefs.js file (Win7)?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
105 messages Options
1234 ... 6
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does TB have a jrefs.js file (Win7)?

W. eWatson-2
On 10/11/2011 5:37 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 11.10.2011 05:47, W. eWatson wrote:
>
>   --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 10/10/2011 10:52 PM, goodwin wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2011 09:09 PM, W. eWatson wrote:
>>>
>>>> See Subject.
>>>
>>> Learn how to post
>> Learn how to read.
>
> Posting only a subject is not proper form when posting in a support
> group. Post a subject and then post a question in the body of the
> message even though it may be the same question, etc. The reason for
> this is that users searching for support topics and such find just "see
> subject". Also it's not proper netiquette.
Where is written that it's improper?  Is it enforced by someone?

Really? A google search will be confused? TB will be confused?  I
usually search by Subject in TB. Sometimes against the body.

Let's suppose I write:
Subject: How do I edit a txt file?
Body: See Subject.

Response.
Body: Use notepad.

So now someone does a Google search: edit txt file. You're saying this
post will never be found, and the reader will be confused if he does???
Suppose he does a TB search. You think the person won't understand the
thread?

Frankly, I would think all subjects should carry a question mark, but I
can understand or forgive a poster for not doing it.

I think we are spending a bit too much time on this.

>
> To expand a bit on your issue, yes, TB has a prefs.js file, it would not
> be possible to run TB without one. Same for Firefox.
>
> Followup set to .general for possible further discussion.
>

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does TB have a jrefs.js file (Win7)?

Jay Garcia
On 11.10.2011 10:03, W. eWatson wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> On 10/11/2011 5:37 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 11.10.2011 05:47, W. eWatson wrote:
>>
>>   --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> On 10/10/2011 10:52 PM, goodwin wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2011 09:09 PM, W. eWatson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> See Subject.
>>>>
>>>> Learn how to post
>>> Learn how to read.
>>
>> Posting only a subject is not proper form when posting in a support
>> group. Post a subject and then post a question in the body of the
>> message even though it may be the same question, etc. The reason for
>> this is that users searching for support topics and such find just "see
>> subject". Also it's not proper netiquette.
> Where is written that it's improper?  Is it enforced by someone?

Written? Generally accepted rules of etiguette, see below.
Enforced? Depends on the forum and it's moderation

> Really? A google search will be confused? TB will be confused?  I
> usually search by Subject in TB. Sometimes against the body.
>
> Let's suppose I write:
> Subject: How do I edit a txt file?
> Body: See Subject.
>
> Response.
> Body: Use notepad.
>
> So now someone does a Google search: edit txt file. You're saying this
> post will never be found, and the reader will be confused if he does???
> Suppose he does a TB search. You think the person won't understand the
> thread?

What if there is no answer yet? A search will only produce "See
Subject". So my further point is if you have the time to post "See
Subject" then why not take an extra 5 seconds to post the question in
the body?

> Frankly, I would think all subjects should carry a question mark, but I
> can understand or forgive a poster for not doing it.

Yes, unless it's an announcement.

> I think we are spending a bit too much time on this.

Possibly

>>
>> To expand a bit on your issue, yes, TB has a prefs.js file, it would not
>> be possible to run TB without one. Same for Firefox.
>>
>> Followup set to .general for possible further discussion.
>>
>

This is what I go by in the 50+ AOL/Compuserve forums that I manage.

Generally accepted posting etiquette:

1. Read the forums rules and guidelines before posting for the first time.

2. Search the other posts to see if your topic is already covered.

3. Use a meaningful title for your thread.

4. Do not use someone else's forum to promote your product, service or
business.

5. Be civil. Personal differences should be handled through email or IM
and not through posts displayed to everyone.

6. Stay on topic.

7. Ignore spammers, respond to them personally and not through the
board, or report them.

8. Do not submit a post that requires readers to download a large
attachment. Either explain the attachment or, better yet, provide a link
to the information.

9. Use plain text over HTML if you want your post to be readable by
everyone.

10. In order to be understood by most people, use correct spelling,
grammar and avoid slang unless you know the word or phrase will be
understood by other members.

11. Do not double post (post the same message twice in one thread) or
cross post (place the same message across several forums).

12. Act in a give and take manner; help others as often as or more than
you ask for help.

13. Do not use all caps or SHOUT in your posts. In addition, one
exclamation point is enough.

14. When replying to a post, do not quote more from the previous post
than you have to.

15. Do not post new problems on someone else's thread and interrupt a
topic of discussion.

16. Do not use someone else's thread for a private conversation.

17. Most forums prohibit warez, cracks or illegal downloading of
software and similar topics.

18. Watch your sense of humor, posts may be read by people from a
variety of backgrounds and ages.

19. Do not use a huge and annoying signature, a modest signature is
fine, moderators may remove large ones anyway.

20. Do not post any information that you want private. Posts should not
contain personal, identifiable information or content embarrassing to
others.

21. Do not post content that violates a copyright.

22. Do not post "empty" or useless responses, such as just "lol" or
"cool." Only post responses when you have something to contribute.

23. Write concisely and do not ramble.

24. Do not use words like "urgent" or "important" in your subject line,
be patient.

25. Post a title in the subject line and the message in the body as this
can be important when searching for questions and answers.

--
*Jay Garcia - Netscape Champion*
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Thunderbird
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does TB have a jrefs.js file (Win7)?

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by W. eWatson-2
On 10/11/2011 10:03 AM, W. eWatson wrote:

> On 10/11/2011 5:37 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 11.10.2011 05:47, W. eWatson wrote:
>>
>> --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> On 10/10/2011 10:52 PM, goodwin wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2011 09:09 PM, W. eWatson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> See Subject.
>>>>
>>>> Learn how to post
>>> Learn how to read.
>>
>> Posting only a subject is not proper form when posting in a support
>> group. Post a subject and then post a question in the body of the
>> message even though it may be the same question, etc. The reason for
>> this is that users searching for support topics and such find just "see
>> subject". Also it's not proper netiquette.
> Where is written that it's improper? Is it enforced by someone?
>
> Really? A google search will be confused? TB will be confused? I usually
> search by Subject in TB. Sometimes against the body.
>
> Let's suppose I write:
> Subject: How do I edit a txt file?
> Body: See Subject.
>
> Response.
> Body: Use notepad.
>
> So now someone does a Google search: edit txt file. You're saying this
> post will never be found, and the reader will be confused if he does???
> Suppose he does a TB search. You think the person won't understand the
> thread?
>
> Frankly, I would think all subjects should carry a question mark, but I
> can understand or forgive a poster for not doing it.
>
> I think we are spending a bit too much time on this.
>
>>
>> To expand a bit on your issue, yes, TB has a prefs.js file, it would not
>> be possible to run TB without one. Same for Firefox.
>>
>> Followup set to .general for possible further discussion.
>>
>
I disagree that all subjects should be questions.  Sometimes they are
general information, tips and tricks, or just expressions of gratitude,
explanations of what a person did to solve a problem, etc.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does TB have a jrefs.js file (Win7)?

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Jay Garcia
On 10/11/2011 10:38 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 11.10.2011 10:03, W. eWatson wrote:
>
>   --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 10/11/2011 5:37 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> On 11.10.2011 05:47, W. eWatson wrote:
>>>
>>>    --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>> On 10/10/2011 10:52 PM, goodwin wrote:
>>>>> On 10/10/2011 09:09 PM, W. eWatson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> See Subject.
>>>>>
>>>>> Learn how to post
>>>> Learn how to read.
>>>
>>> Posting only a subject is not proper form when posting in a support
>>> group. Post a subject and then post a question in the body of the
>>> message even though it may be the same question, etc. The reason for
>>> this is that users searching for support topics and such find just "see
>>> subject". Also it's not proper netiquette.
>> Where is written that it's improper?  Is it enforced by someone?
>
> Written? Generally accepted rules of etiguette, see below.
> Enforced? Depends on the forum and it's moderation
>
>> Really? A google search will be confused? TB will be confused?  I
>> usually search by Subject in TB. Sometimes against the body.
>>
>> Let's suppose I write:
>> Subject: How do I edit a txt file?
>> Body: See Subject.
>>
>> Response.
>> Body: Use notepad.
>>
>> So now someone does a Google search: edit txt file. You're saying this
>> post will never be found, and the reader will be confused if he does???
>> Suppose he does a TB search. You think the person won't understand the
>> thread?
>
> What if there is no answer yet? A search will only produce "See
> Subject". So my further point is if you have the time to post "See
> Subject" then why not take an extra 5 seconds to post the question in
> the body?
>
>> Frankly, I would think all subjects should carry a question mark, but I
>> can understand or forgive a poster for not doing it.
>
> Yes, unless it's an announcement.
>
>> I think we are spending a bit too much time on this.
>
> Possibly
>
>>>
>>> To expand a bit on your issue, yes, TB has a prefs.js file, it would not
>>> be possible to run TB without one. Same for Firefox.
>>>
>>> Followup set to .general for possible further discussion.
>>>
>>
>
> This is what I go by in the 50+ AOL/Compuserve forums that I manage.
>
> Generally accepted posting etiquette:
>
> 1. Read the forums rules and guidelines before posting for the first time.
>
> 2. Search the other posts to see if your topic is already covered.
>
> 3. Use a meaningful title for your thread.
>
> 4. Do not use someone else's forum to promote your product, service or
> business.
>
> 5. Be civil. Personal differences should be handled through email or IM
> and not through posts displayed to everyone.
>
> 6. Stay on topic.
>
> 7. Ignore spammers, respond to them personally and not through the
> board, or report them.
>
> 8. Do not submit a post that requires readers to download a large
> attachment. Either explain the attachment or, better yet, provide a link
> to the information.
>
> 9. Use plain text over HTML if you want your post to be readable by
> everyone.
>
> 10. In order to be understood by most people, use correct spelling,
> grammar and avoid slang unless you know the word or phrase will be
> understood by other members.
>
> 11. Do not double post (post the same message twice in one thread) or
> cross post (place the same message across several forums).
>
> 12. Act in a give and take manner; help others as often as or more than
> you ask for help.
>
> 13. Do not use all caps or SHOUT in your posts. In addition, one
> exclamation point is enough.
>
> 14. When replying to a post, do not quote more from the previous post
> than you have to.
>
> 15. Do not post new problems on someone else's thread and interrupt a
> topic of discussion.
>
> 16. Do not use someone else's thread for a private conversation.
>
> 17. Most forums prohibit warez, cracks or illegal downloading of
> software and similar topics.
>
> 18. Watch your sense of humor, posts may be read by people from a
> variety of backgrounds and ages.
>
> 19. Do not use a huge and annoying signature, a modest signature is
> fine, moderators may remove large ones anyway.
>
> 20. Do not post any information that you want private. Posts should not
> contain personal, identifiable information or content embarrassing to
> others.
>
> 21. Do not post content that violates a copyright.
>
> 22. Do not post "empty" or useless responses, such as just "lol" or
> "cool." Only post responses when you have something to contribute.
>
> 23. Write concisely and do not ramble.
>
> 24. Do not use words like "urgent" or "important" in your subject line,
> be patient.
>
> 25. Post a title in the subject line and the message in the body as this
> can be important when searching for questions and answers.
>

I only disagree with number 14.  Deciding what is, and what is not
important to the person reading the reply, and others, trying to follow
the conversation, especially when troubleshooting, can be very difficult
if anything is cut.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does TB have a jrefs.js file (Win7)?

Jay Garcia
On 11.10.2011 16:51, Ron Hunter wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> I only disagree with number 14.  Deciding what is, and what is not
> important to the person reading the reply, and others, trying to follow
> the conversation, especially when troubleshooting, can be very difficult
> if anything is cut.
>

Disagree to whatever you want, those are "general" guidelines subject
the venue/setting.


--
*Jay Garcia - Netscape Champion*
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Thunderbird
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

John McWilliams via TB
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
On 10/11/11   PDT 2:34 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:
> On 10/11/2011 10:03 AM, W. eWatson wrote:

>> Frankly, I would think all subjects should carry a question mark, but I
>> can understand or forgive a poster for not doing it.
>>
>> I think we are spending a bit too much time on this.
>>
> I disagree that all subjects should be questions. Sometimes they are
> general information, tips and tricks, or just expressions of gratitude,
> explanations of what a person did to solve a problem, etc.

Ron is correct, and Mr/Ms Watson is too: it's been covered quite
adequately now.

Myself, I love replies that are well trimmed, but not everyone here
agrees— or can't be arsed to do so.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Otto Wyss
John McWilliams wrote:

> Myself, I love replies that are well trimmed, but not everyone here
> agrees— or can't be arsed to do so.
>
It's really annoying to have first scroll down to read a sentence or two. I've
stopped reading these and the following messages when people can't trimm down
their replies.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Mike Easter-2
Otto Wyss wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>
>> Myself, I love replies that are well trimmed, but not everyone here
>> agrees— or can't be arsed to do so.
>>
> It's really annoying to have first scroll down to read a sentence or
> two. I've stopped reading these and the following messages when people
> can't trimm down their replies.

There is more to the problem of untrimmed bottom posting than just
having to 'scroll' to the bottom. One can 'zip' to the bottom with a
keyclick.  The larger problem IMO is that that untrimmed type of bottom
posting is almost identical in terms of its (lack of) context problem to
top posting.

Trimming isolates and clarifies what a poster is talking about. The
trimmer is 'speaking to' just those words which precede what the trimmer
says next.

The top poster as well as the untrimmed bottom poster can't be bothered
with helping to clarify/ contextualize/ their message and they can't be
bothered with 'cleaning up' all of the junk which they leave behind
before they post their words.

Trimming is an 'egalitarian' or fair-sharing of the burden of trying
one's best to make one's message more clear by carefully selecting the
context for it.

Not trimming, whether the untrimmed message added is on the bottom or on
the top, not only tends to lack clarity because there is no properly
isolated context for the next words, but it also is 'self-ish' (looking
after one's self interest rather than others) in that the non-trimmer
doesn't want to spend a little more time to help the next person/s who
has/have to both read and post.

The next readers after bottom and top non-trimmers have a little more
work to understand absent a good context and the next posters have a
little more work to do to clean up all of the clutter which was left by
the untrimmers.

The only thing that is slightly better about untrimmed bottom posting
than top posting is that there is an attribution structure and a
conversational order buried in the untrimmed non-contextualized content
so that some industrious trimmer can more easily reconstruct a trimmed
conversation if necessary.

The quickest way to 'reconstruct' a reply to a top poster is to trim
everything that chronologically preceded the top poster's own remarks -
'brutal' trimming.


--
Mike Easter
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Otto Wyss
On 10/14/2011 1:35 PM, Otto Wyss wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>
>> Myself, I love replies that are well trimmed, but not everyone here
>> agrees— or can't be arsed to do so.
>>
> It's really annoying to have first scroll down to read a sentence or
> two. I've stopped reading these and the following messages when people
> can't trimm down their replies.

I find it a lot more annoying when someone cuts important information
from a post, especially if it is MY post, leaving ME looking like I
don't know what's going on.  I have enough 'senior moments' without
someone helping me confuse.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Mike Easter-2
On 10/14/2011 4:03 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> The quickest

So, I trimmed your message.  Now HOW does this make it clearer?
Ludicrous idea.
If one trims too much, or misunderstands the intent, and trims to leave
out the necessary content, then it only leads to confusion.  Saying
'less is more' doesn't make it true.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Mike Easter-2
Ron Hunter wrote:
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> The quickest
>
> So, I trimmed your message.  Now HOW does this make it clearer?
> Ludicrous idea.

You did a bad job of trimming there. That demonstration does not prove
any point against optimal trimming.

> If one trims too much, or misunderstands the intent, and trims to leave
> out the necessary content, then it only leads to confusion.  Saying
> 'less is more' doesn't make it true.

Your argument is analogous to saying that if some surgeons are going to
be amputating the wrong extremity or even having some other surgical
untoward result, that therefore all surgery should cease.

The duty of the trimmer is to retain the meaning or gist of what was
said before and to be responsible to not 'twist' the meaning of what the
previous poster said.

If the trimmer doesn't properly understand what was said before and
'mis-trims' then that presents an opportunity for the conversation to be
directed toward correcting any misunderstanding. If a non-trimmer
misunderstands, the misunderstanding remains obscure and some deranged
conversation results instead of the problem being corrected.

Another alternative to optimal trimming would be for everything to be
trimmed and for the following poster to 'recapitulate' or summarize that
content which they intend to address, but that type of contextualizing
is way too much trouble normally.


--
Mike Easter
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Terry R.-3
In reply to this post by Otto Wyss
On 10/14/2011 11:35 AM On a whim, Otto Wyss pounded out on the keyboard

> John McWilliams wrote:
>
>> Myself, I love replies that are well trimmed, but not everyone here
>> agrees— or can't be arsed to do so.
>>
> It's really annoying to have first scroll down to read a sentence or two. I've
> stopped reading these and the following messages when people can't trimm down
> their replies.

Ron Hunter is one of the worst offenders.  100 lines of text and at the
bottom he types, "no".


Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Terry R.-3
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
On 10/14/2011 2:24 PM On a whim, Ron Hunter pounded out on the keyboard

> On 10/14/2011 4:03 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
>> The quickest
>
> So, I trimmed your message.  Now HOW does this make it clearer?
> Ludicrous idea.
> If one trims too much, or misunderstands the intent, and trims to leave
> out the necessary content, then it only leads to confusion.  Saying
> 'less is more' doesn't make it true.
>

Once again trying to justify the way you do things, and won't change
regardless.


Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Terry R.-3
In reply to this post by Mike Easter-2
On 10/14/2011 2:43 PM On a whim, Mike Easter pounded out on the keyboard

> Ron Hunter wrote:
>> Mike Easter wrote:
>>> The quickest
>> So, I trimmed your message.  Now HOW does this make it clearer?
>> Ludicrous idea.
>
> You did a bad job of trimming there. That demonstration does not prove
> any point against optimal trimming.
>

Typical of Ron.


Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Terry R.-3
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
On 10/14/2011 2:21 PM On a whim, Ron Hunter pounded out on the keyboard

> I find it a lot more annoying when someone cuts important information
> from a post, especially if it is MY post, leaving ME looking like I
> don't know what's going on.  I have enough 'senior moments' without
> someone helping me confuse.
>

What do you care?  You filter your own posts anyway!


Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Mike Easter-2
On 10/14/2011 4:43 PM, Mike Easter wrote:

> Ron Hunter wrote:
>> Mike Easter wrote:
>>> The quickest
>>
>> So, I trimmed your message. Now HOW does this make it clearer?
>> Ludicrous idea.
>
> You did a bad job of trimming there. That demonstration does not prove
> any point against optimal trimming.
>
>> If one trims too much, or misunderstands the intent, and trims to
>> leave out the necessary content, then it only leads to confusion.
>> Saying 'less is more' doesn't make it true.
>
> Your argument is analogous to saying that if some surgeons are going to
> be amputating the wrong extremity or even having some other surgical
> untoward result, that therefore all surgery should cease.
>
> The duty of the trimmer is to retain the meaning or gist of what was
> said before and to be responsible to not 'twist' the meaning of what the
> previous poster said.
>
> If the trimmer doesn't properly understand what was said before and
> 'mis-trims' then that presents an opportunity for the conversation to be
> directed toward correcting any misunderstanding. If a non-trimmer
> misunderstands, the misunderstanding remains obscure and some deranged
> conversation results instead of the problem being corrected.
>
> Another alternative to optimal trimming would be for everything to be
> trimmed and for the following poster to 'recapitulate' or summarize that
> content which they intend to address, but that type of contextualizing
> is way too much trouble normally.
>
>
All that can seriously impact the time of the person doing a lot of
support.  Not only that, it can lengthen the time it takes to get a
usable resolution.
The previous custom of not trimming didn't just happen.  It evolved over
a long period of time, and served well.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

PhillipJones
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
Ron Hunter wrote:

> On 10/14/2011 1:35 PM, Otto Wyss wrote:
>> John McWilliams wrote:
>>
>>> Myself, I love replies that are well trimmed, but not everyone here
>>> agrees— or can't be arsed to do so.
>>>
>> It's really annoying to have first scroll down to read a sentence or
>> two. I've stopped reading these and the following messages when people
>> can't trimm down their replies.
>
> I find it a lot more annoying when someone cuts important information
> from a post, especially if it is MY post, leaving ME looking like I
> don't know what's going on. I have enough 'senior moments' without
> someone helping me confuse.
>
I agree. I want to see the whole conversation (post Replies) so that if
I am trying to answer a support question I know what has been Tried. I
don't want to post an answer and get a nasty reply "You dumbAxx did you
see that reply two days ago."  No I didn't because the post has been
trimmed. The proper way is leave untrimmed from beginning to end.

--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net        mailto:[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Otto Wyss
In reply to this post by Terry R.-3
Terry R. wrote:

> On 10/14/2011 2:21 PM On a whim, Ron Hunter pounded out on the keyboard
>
>> I find it a lot more annoying when someone cuts important information
>> from a post, especially if it is MY post, leaving ME looking like I
>> don't know what's going on.  I have enough 'senior moments' without
>> someone helping me confuse.
>>
>
> What do you care?  You filter your own posts anyway!
>
I don't care, I simply don't read untrimmed messages. Why shouldn't I filter my
own posts? I know what I've written. Besides I guess you don't have understand
what trimming messages means.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Trimming messages (was:Posting etiquette)

Otto Wyss
In reply to this post by Otto Wyss
It seems many here don't know what quoting and trimming messages is for. Quotes
are not for information so readers knows what's written before (anybody just can
read the previous messages). Quotes are a hint for which part of the messsage an
answer is given. If several answers have been given they have to be located next
to the part the actual answer belongs to. Seems this principle has been gotten
lost here in Mozilla newsgroups.

Albeit I don't expect people to change there manners I suggest trimming is done
by Mozilla newsreaders (SM/TB) itself. Maybe configurable by an option. Trimming
should be show as "<snipped>" or "<trimmed>" and hopefully expandable/collabsable.

I also suggest a nested view of threads so all messages are shown in one single
message window. Such a nested view together with trimmed message would greatly
enhance reading news. And besides this would give Mozilla an argument to prefer
it of other newsreaders.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Posting etiquette, [was: TB have a.....]

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Otto Wyss
On 10/15/2011 1:58 AM, Otto Wyss wrote:

> Terry R. wrote:
>> On 10/14/2011 2:21 PM On a whim, Ron Hunter pounded out on the keyboard
>>
>>> I find it a lot more annoying when someone cuts important information
>>> from a post, especially if it is MY post, leaving ME looking like I
>>> don't know what's going on. I have enough 'senior moments' without
>>> someone helping me confuse.
>>>
>>
>> What do you care? You filter your own posts anyway!
>>
> I don't care, I simply don't read untrimmed messages. Why shouldn't I
> filter my own posts? I know what I've written. Besides I guess you don't
> have understand what trimming messages means.
>
I understand that I if tried to do that with every message, I would
spend several times as much time with every message, so YOU don't have
to look a couple of inches down on your screen.  NOT going there.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
1234 ... 6