Top posting

[Michael W. Oliver]

On 2004-03-21T23:26:47-0700, Rob M wrote:
> Forgive me if I am out of line here.  I am new to FreeBSD and this list, I 
> have been using both for about a week now after being with Windows since 3.1.  

Welcome!

> I have always been a top poster and a bottom feeder, I have never known it 
> was a big deal and every environment I have been in has top posted.  

Each community can certainly state it's own preferences, and it is
polite to follow those preferences.  It does tend to get hairy when you
are part of many different communities, each with it's own style that
you have to remember, lest you get chastised.  I think the FreeBSD
community is quite patient and understanding with new users, especially
on this particular list (questions).  On some of the other lists with
more developer interaction, the atmosphere can become somewhat heated...
it is sometimes fun to watch!

> I have been weary of posting as I dont want to irritate anyone by asking  
> something that is most likely simple to many of you.  I RTFM but just dont 
> get it sometimes so I lurk here and see if there is anything that pertains to 
> me or I go on the web and find it that way.  So far it has worked.

That is wonderful!  It is truly amazing how much information can be
found by searching the archives, googling, reading the FAQ, and just
reading the daily emails.  As I eluded to before, the 'questions' list
is the most user-friendly of the lists that I subscribe to.  Even so,
once you have lurked here for a couple of years, you will see the same
questions raised over and over again.  Some get ignored, some get a FAQ
pointer email, and some get a warm RTFM.

> Something struck a chord with me so I need clarification.
>
> On Sunday 21 March 2004 08:54 PM, Michael W. Oliver wrote:
> >
> > What I find comical about this topic (and it never ceases to recur every
> > few months) is that the clueless who post, asking for clue, refuse to
> > accept pointers on something so simple as email etiquette from the same
> > people they assume will provide clue on so many other more complex
> > issues!
>
> This seems arrogant to me, though it could be just that it is e-mail and I 
> cant see the person typing on the other end.  Also, if I am asking a question 
> about something I am having a hard time with then I would like an answer to 
> it, not pointers on something so simple as email etiquette from the same 
> person that is providing me a clue on my complex issue.  If I wanted to be 
> instructed on e-mail etiquette I would have asked.

I can see your point, but try to look at it from a less critical point
of view.  When you are provided with more information than you asked
for, such as email etiquette in this case, then count yourself as
fortunate that someone has taken the time to help you format email that
is sent to this list in such a way that it will garner the most
positive, helpful responses.

> Dont take that last comment out of line, I am sure with all of the same 
> answers you give over and over again that trying to get things in an even 
> format would be nice.  But it is part of the reason I am uneasy about asking 
> a question, not only do I feel ignorant because I am asking what is most 
> likely an easy question but I might irk someone if I dont format it in the 
> form of a question.

Like I said, the 'questions' list is the most user-friendly of the lists
that I am on.  You should not feel uneasy about posting to this list, as
long as you have done a certain amount of searching in the archives,
Google, etc. beforehand.  There are few things that get the 'questions'
community riled up as much as people who refuse to search for
information on their own, but would rather be spoon-fed.  As stated
earlier, you don't fall into this category.

> Secondly;
>
> > In the end, why not just write like you speak?  In a verbal
> > conversation, each party speaks in turn (in-line replies), provided they
> > have something worthwhile to say on the given subject (trimming what
> > isn't relevant), otherwise they keep their pie-hole shut (don't reply at
> > all). 
>
> When I speak I dont give them back the same thing they just said to me and 
> then my reply, I just reply to them.  This means that in an e-mail I would 
> click reply, delete everything on the page, type my response and send it.  At 
> least it isn't a top post though, maybe we should just "only post".

Ok, I see what you are trying to say, but think of it this way:

When you reply in-line, keeping the context of the previous email, you
aren't speaking the same text back to the original party, you are
quoting what they said so that your email can be taken in context with
the overall conversation, or at least the part of the conversation that
you are participating in (trimming).

> Sorry for the book.  By the way, I have gleaned something from all of you that 
> have posted.  Michael, I hope you don't feel like I am picking on you or 
> calling you out.  I am the new guy here and dont know how things work here, 
> smack me and show me the way it should be here and I will comply.

Hey, no smacking from me, just a warm welcome to the FreeBSD community.
I hope that you stay a while ;-)

-- 
Mike
perl -e 'print unpack("u","88V]N=&%C=\"!I;F9O(&EN(&AE861E<G,*");'

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20040322/b1ba29b3/attachment.bin