- MCP server with stdio transport for local use - Search episodes, transcripts, hosts, and series - 4,511 episodes with metadata and transcripts - Data loader with in-memory JSON storage 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
372 lines
34 KiB
Plaintext
372 lines
34 KiB
Plaintext
Episode: 1740
|
|
Title: HPR1740: Mailing List Etiquette
|
|
Source: https://hub.hackerpublicradio.org/ccdn.php?filename=/eps/hpr1740/hpr1740.mp3
|
|
Transcribed: 2025-10-18 08:31:07
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
This in HPR episode 1,740 entitled Mailing List etiquette, it is hosted by Dave Morris and
|
|
in about 46 minutes long, the summery, some advice about best practices on Mailing List.
|
|
This episode of HPR is brought to you by AnanasThost.com, get 15% discount on all shared hosting
|
|
with the offer code HPR15, that's HPR15, better web hosting that's honest and fair
|
|
at AnanasThost.com.
|
|
Hello everyone, this is Dave Morris. My topic today is entitled Mailing List etiquette
|
|
and just to give you some context to start with in February this year, which is 2015, I
|
|
created a script to enhance the monthly community news show notes by adding a section to it,
|
|
which summarises the various discussions on the HPR mailing list over the last month.
|
|
My script processes the messages that it finds on the G main site, that's where we copy
|
|
our list messages and it formats them into threads and reports about each of the threads
|
|
how many messages are there and so forth. Now as I was writing this script, I noticed
|
|
that people were often making errors when they were applying to existing messages and
|
|
message threads and they were also making the mistakes when creating new threads on the
|
|
list and that motivated me to talk about avoiding doing that and also just some general
|
|
do's and don'ts of mailing list use which I thought might be helpful. So as usual, I've
|
|
got a short set of notes on the main HPR page and then that links to a larger set which is
|
|
much more comprehensive. In fact, the notes are quite long, my son checked them over for me
|
|
and he said, Dad, this is too long, you should put a summary in. So I did, there's a summary
|
|
of the key points in the document, really the do's and don'ts of it, there's a technical piece as
|
|
well which I haven't summarized so I hope you find that useful. You could stop at that if you really
|
|
wanted to, you just wanted to get the gist of it and not hear the details, read the details more
|
|
as a point. So let's start off with the definition of a thread. Thread is a collection of messages
|
|
relating to a subject. It's an old concept, goes back to a time before the internet and I remember
|
|
finding this concept in a use net news before we had email at all. Our university I worked at
|
|
was a great user of use net news back in those days and there were very strict rules about how
|
|
you conversed on news which stuck with me and I carried on into email. So in current mail systems
|
|
you tend to find the term conversation used as well as an alternative to thread, probably a little
|
|
bit more meaningful. But whatever you call it, it still boils down to a way of ordering messages
|
|
to show which ones are applied to another. In fact, if you think about it or as you
|
|
if you examine what's actually happening, it's a sort of tree-like structure where there's a route
|
|
of the tree which is first message and then branches which are the replies and replies to replies
|
|
and so on and so forth. Now many mail clients offer a threaded view of mail messages. I have been
|
|
using Thunderbird now for a fair number of years and because I'm a devian user it's called Ice Dove
|
|
some obscure reason and threading can be enabled on a perfolder basis. You don't have to see the
|
|
threaded view and but I think it does a lovely job. So I've included a picture in the notes
|
|
showing a view of a thread from the HPR mailing list. While I was researching this subject,
|
|
I found an add-on for Thunderbird which does another analysis of threads. It's called ThreadViz
|
|
has links to it in the show notes and it displays a graphic at the top of a message
|
|
giving quite a good I think anyway a good visualisation of what a thread is and how it's laid out
|
|
and who is responsible for which bit it's all coloured and got lines linking bits together.
|
|
So that's included in the picture as well just for your interest. So the thread that I've analysed
|
|
is the one from February the 12th this year where can can file and forward a message to the list
|
|
from an organisation called Cybery looking to see if we if we wanted to join in any cross-promotional
|
|
opportunities. Now hopefully you can see this and it renders okay for you. You'll see that the
|
|
thread is displayed in the Thunderbird pane and I've expanded it. There's a little triangle
|
|
to the left of the pane which when you click it opens up the whole thread and the thread
|
|
the messages are lined up one under the other with little lines connecting them to show which
|
|
ones are applied to what and the subject of each one is displayed and the sender and the times
|
|
on. I haven't included every every minute detail I've cut it trimmed it down somewhat. Anyway
|
|
hopefully you can you can get an idea of what the thread is and looks like. If you look there's
|
|
also the thread vis display in this image and I think it does a really nice job and it does an
|
|
extra thing that you don't get from Thunderbird which is it shows there's an initial message an
|
|
external message which starts the whole thread. What that was was a message was sent to Ken and Ken
|
|
forwarded it and the thread vis is aware of this and has indicated that there was an earlier message
|
|
which is not part of the HPR thread. It wasn't a message sent to the list. It does it with a little
|
|
gray box and all the others are colored circles connected with colored lines and the length of
|
|
the line I've switched that option on. The length of the line gives you an indication of the time
|
|
between one message and the next. You can see the see the messages if you just hover your mouse cursor
|
|
over the circle and you can click on it and it will take you to that message you view it in the
|
|
the normal viewing arrangement that you have on this male client. The only just to just to continue
|
|
with the thread vis thing in case you're interested in it. The only slight downside I've found
|
|
with it is that it uses the global search and indexer within Thunderbird and so you need to switch
|
|
that on. I switched it off in the past because my previous machine was not quite up to running it
|
|
doing lots of male indexing all the time. My new machine i7 with quite a lot of RAM does a fine
|
|
job so I hardly notice it but if you want to get into this you might want to bear that in mind.
|
|
Threadvis uses the global search and index thing database I assume it is to enable threading across
|
|
across folders which is I don't know if any many other things that do that. I don't know if you've
|
|
got lots of folders or indeed I assume lots of male accounts being viewed from the same
|
|
client. I don't have really investigated that but it's quite a nice concept. Next let's look at
|
|
how email threads actually work and we need to look a little bit into the structure of email
|
|
had what an email message is and so forth in order to do this. This structure is defined by an
|
|
internet specification known as an rfc request for comments and the one covering email is rfc
|
|
number 5322. The title is internet message format. Not suggesting you dig very deeply into these
|
|
but in case you ever need to know about the rfc's I've linked to them in the show notes. Now an email
|
|
message consists of two parts the header and the body. To be absolutely precise about it there's
|
|
actually another structure called the envelope in which the header and body are enclosed but that's
|
|
a thing that's used when the message is in transit and it's removed on delivery. So we don't want to
|
|
go into too much detail about this and there's many many many sources of information about the whole
|
|
process of how email works such as the Wikipedia article I've linked to. Anyway the message header
|
|
contains lines known as fields and these have the format of a name, name of the field,
|
|
followed by a colon, then a space and a value and the value can be any length pretty much.
|
|
Can actually run over several lines but there's a convention we have to indent the second line
|
|
and second and subsequent lines. The body part is the actual message content and that as you
|
|
probably know can vary in structure from just a simple load of text to a very arbitrarily complex
|
|
hierarchy of mind objects such as HTML, pictures, videos, audio, all these sorts of things
|
|
encoded as mind objects. Again there's a link to mind if you want to dig deeper more deeply. I
|
|
won't go into any more about that. So in the notes there's an example of some of the header fields
|
|
and I've actually extracted these from the first message in the thread that we were looking at
|
|
earlier in the picture. It's a message from Ken Fallon and it's to the HPR mailing list and the
|
|
subject is forward FWD colon cross-promotional opportunities. Now these headers, these particular
|
|
headers are used by the male client when displaying the message. Usually they're reformatted and
|
|
made nicer than the bare headers. So one of the key headers, header fields I should say
|
|
but it's important in terms of threading is the message ID field. Message ID is the name part is
|
|
message-hyphen ID and it's followed by a value that looks a bit like an email address but it isn't one
|
|
and it's a unique identifier. It's always got a less than greater sign around it and
|
|
it's not for human consumption, it's for machine readability so it's usually some long
|
|
string of gobbling yolk, hexadecimal values, whatever it is. It's meant to be globally unique
|
|
as much as that's possible to achieve so it should be there should be no other email that has
|
|
that ID on the planet. One of the funny things about the standards of email is that there's a huge
|
|
amount of flexibility sometimes to the point where you wonder why it was ever ever decided to be so
|
|
and one of the things there is that it's not mandatory to have a message ID field but if you don't
|
|
then lots of things fail. So my personal opinion is the email clients that don't generate a message
|
|
ID are broken. I don't know of any of hand but I won't be surprised if there are some out there
|
|
and the next two fields are called in reply to and references. In reply to is in hyphen reply hyphen
|
|
to and references as it sounds. So when an email client replies to a message it generates header fields
|
|
which refer back to the ancestors of the message. So the first message that's ever written on a
|
|
subject you can regard as the parent or the root of the tree depending on how you want to look at it
|
|
and the references or the in reply to refer back to that message as the parent.
|
|
The in reply to field normally contains a single value which just refers to the parent message
|
|
ID. The references field is a bit more complex and doesn't have to be there. In fact neither of these
|
|
have to be there although you can't be threatening if you don't get either but you can have either of them
|
|
it depends on how it's been implemented. The references is a list. When you first encounter
|
|
when I first encounter I thought oh gosh this is great. It will contain everything I need to know
|
|
about a thread but of course it doesn't and it can't I guess. It would get ridiculously long
|
|
if it contained everything but what it does contain it will contain the contents of the parent
|
|
messages references field if there is one and then it will be followed by the parent's message
|
|
ID field so it points to the parent and if the parent happened not to be the first in the chain
|
|
the parent will be pointing back to its parent so that will also be in the references and that might
|
|
be that might also have a parent which is pointed back to and so on. So you do have at least
|
|
some of a chain there that lets you follow back up the thread and in every case when I say a
|
|
pointer back to a message I'm talking about holding the message ID of the message. So I've given
|
|
an example a real example of references and in reply to fields on the message which immediately
|
|
followed the first message in the thread that we looked at earlier. Now something rather odd about
|
|
this one is a little unusual about this particular case and that's that in the references list
|
|
that there's not only a pointer to the first message in the thread there's also a pointer to
|
|
another message which has got a string of numbers and stuff followed by cyberauri.it so that's
|
|
the message that originally came in saying you might be interested in this which was then
|
|
forwarded to the list and so that gives you some clues to how the whole business of pointing to
|
|
an external message could be arranged. Cyberauri message is not on the list it's an external
|
|
message which is being referenced. I've actually put in the notes the relevant headers of the message
|
|
that Ken originally received which are cited in his forwarded message okay it's getting a bit
|
|
deep now we won't go too much deeper so so there's the question what's a thread then so you
|
|
you're probably and I've hinted already that an email message thread is the the structure that's
|
|
defined by the links that I've been talking about. For each message points to its ancestors
|
|
and the whole collection of messages formed a tree if you if you if you analyze it you say message A
|
|
is points back to message B etc etc then if you looked at it from a different point if you can say
|
|
well the children or at least the the the the sub thread that hangs from a given message
|
|
of these messages so you can actually build an actual tree structure in in your program which
|
|
which is capable of representing the relationships between all of these messages so I did this in
|
|
the script that I was mentioning and when I was researching more for this this talk I came across
|
|
a site written by a guy called Jamie Zuinsky where he was one of the authors of one of the early
|
|
Mozilla mail products and he talks a great length about how he implemented the threading algorithm
|
|
which is I found certainly quite interesting so as I say it's in I've used something like this which
|
|
I arrived at independently I should say that's probably garbage but no mind it works and it's also
|
|
in the G main software because it also does some quite nice threading I think that's as far as
|
|
I want to go with this now I can pretty sure that I'm heading off into the weeds here and you might
|
|
be less enthusiastic about all this than than I am so I'll I'll stop at this point and get on to
|
|
the the next subheading which is talking about list etiquette so you do find this referred to as
|
|
netiquette I think it's sort of internet etiquette is where that's come from but there's a bunch of
|
|
things that you're advised to do to to make the whole business of conversing via email work
|
|
properly and the main thing is I mean two two things are thread consistency and the other is
|
|
making sure that the sort of structure of the the body of the message citations and so forth
|
|
is all properly structured so if we look at the thread consistency and some do's and don'ts there
|
|
first point is when you come to reply to a message on a mailing list which is part of a thread
|
|
then you need to use reply we'll come on to some of the alternative things that people do which
|
|
which are not a good idea a bit later on but you should have a reply facility within your client
|
|
and it will definitely look at the message you're applying to use the headers and we'll set up
|
|
the in reply to and references headers appropriately in the message that's constructed if your
|
|
male client can't do this then it's broken I think I'd be fascinated to to hear about it maybe
|
|
you need to configure things I've never seen such a such a thing normally they come with this
|
|
feature built-in in my experience anyway or you need to throw it away and get something else which
|
|
works properly just as an aside you should pay attention to how you do the reply because you
|
|
might be misled by where the reply is actually going to so in the case of the HPR list the list
|
|
is not configured to make your client send its replies to the list so what will happen is if you
|
|
simply hit the plain reply button on some some clients they will try and send the reply to the
|
|
sender only yeah not include the list my email client this thunderbird i-stuff has got a reply
|
|
to list button on it and that sends to the list only a not to the sender which is probably the
|
|
best thing to do there's also another one which is reply to all which is which goes to the list
|
|
and to the sender or sender oh no yeah it'd be single sender but list and other people cc'd perhaps
|
|
I normally just reply back to the list unless I know that perhaps somebody's been included who's
|
|
not on the list for whatever reason I normally do the reply to list because I'm assuming that
|
|
people who are sending things to the list just want to get answers from the list they don't want
|
|
their own private answer as well because they've got to then have to file that somewhere as well
|
|
that's not always a valid assumption I have to say some people do prefer to keep the list
|
|
mail separate from private mail and they would see your reply to the list and to them as sort of both
|
|
so I don't work that way but there you go so the second point in the etiquette list is don't change
|
|
the subject line so it's a the point of the conversation or thread is that it's about a particular
|
|
subject and it's bad etiquette to change that subject field as you go I mean you're you can do it
|
|
your client and probably let you do it but it's not good practice to do it the only the only
|
|
odd case where it might be if if is if the first subject was misleading and you want to make it
|
|
clearer but the convention is to put the new subject line the new subject topic of the start of
|
|
that field and then in brackets usually square brackets put was followed by the original topic
|
|
so people can say oh look it's changed oh it's changed because that first topic was was not very
|
|
clear now it's clearer but probably best to avoid it if you possibly can now here's the next one
|
|
is don't try to start a new thread by replying to an old one this is a very common problem
|
|
mistake that's made somebody will come to the mailing list they'll see oh there's the last
|
|
message that came out right oh I want to send a message to the list and what they do is they just
|
|
open the last message hit reply and change the subject line now this is very bad etiquette it breaks
|
|
the threading process because there's a brand new topic just appeared in the same thread and it
|
|
also has it has consequences which can have consequences which which can be counterproductive
|
|
so I'm giving you example here which is that the consequences that is the the script that summarizes
|
|
the message threads the hpr community news will not see such a change of topic as a new thread
|
|
and what it does is it lists the thread topics and number of messages so if you have tried to
|
|
start a new thread by replying to an old one your message will be included in that existing thread
|
|
and it won't appear as a separate topic that's because it's not impossible to do that in the
|
|
the picture in the the first picture in the the notes you can see the existing thread is
|
|
towards the end the topic is changed to intro and outro and without changing to a brand new thread
|
|
so the subject of intro and outro doesn't appear in the community news notes for February
|
|
because of that so don't do that just if you need to start a new a new um
|
|
I mean just write a new message to the list certainly open up an existing message but create a
|
|
brand new message and copy the the address if you if you can't remember to what it is yourself
|
|
don't reply to it but another common mistake which I've headed don't start a new thread to
|
|
reply to an existing one people do tend to do a thing where they want to make a comment on
|
|
a message but what they do is they create a brand new message copy the subject from the the
|
|
existing one and then write their their addition their comment their their message that will not
|
|
be joined into the thread because as you probably hopefully got from the the the techie bit earlier
|
|
on the mail client will not because you're not using reply it will not pick up the the links to
|
|
to link it into the thread because you're not replying um so it will be an orphan message that's
|
|
dangling around all by itself now some thread analyzing systems do try hard to get around this
|
|
problem the strategies look for these orphaned messages which are determined from the fact that
|
|
their subject line is the same as an existing thread but they're not threaded then it joins
|
|
them into the thread at a appropriate position based on the timestamp the g main algorithm does
|
|
that so if you look at the threaded view of of hpr messages there you will find that it's sometimes
|
|
repaired stuff Jamie Zowinsky's system which he described does this as well by an orphaned message
|
|
refitting process and the the the hpr community news script all that i wrote also does this
|
|
but thunderbird doesn't when you you're looking at the threads and the display that i showed you
|
|
earlier if the subject line is changed you know even if it's not if it's just a small spelling
|
|
change or a capitalization change then no algorithm will will repair this none to my knowledge
|
|
anyway because there's there's all of the clues that would allow it to to do that are in the
|
|
subject line so if you break that then you can't even expect any repairs but the best thing
|
|
does not to do it in the first place the other issue that seems to hit the hpr list quite a lot is
|
|
digest messages don't reply to them many mailing list systems do offer a digest facility and the
|
|
idea is that if it's a very busy list it can be more convenient for people to receive a daily
|
|
message from the list where all of the messages since the last digest are all bunched together
|
|
and they do this on the basis of a time timing between the last digest or there's a counter which
|
|
look in the number of messages that are going through the list and when it reaches a threshold 50
|
|
say or something it will send send out a digest anyway the digest consists of all of these
|
|
messages bundled together into one individual message and you know it has its has its advantages
|
|
but i would suggest that it's probably the most useful where the list is very busy
|
|
or more to the point contains read-only material like newsletters or something like that
|
|
just to expand a little bit more on this digest business some mailing list systems including
|
|
the the mailman system that's used through the hpr list generate either plain text or
|
|
mime digests you can actually select which one you want in your own configuration the plain
|
|
text format conforms to an rfc rfc 1153 it's not that complex it's a great format for human
|
|
readability there's a sort of table of contents type bit followed by the the messages but the
|
|
messages have been severely hacked down to the the minimum the minimum headers and the the body
|
|
of the message and sometimes the the message has been trimmed down a lot if if the message is in
|
|
a mime format has got attachments or anything like that those won't be in the a digest usually
|
|
in this form but certainly all of the threading information is purged as the digest is created
|
|
the mime format is is different because it consists of the digest message is one message with
|
|
the summary in it of the messages to follow followed by a bunch of attachments and each
|
|
attachment is a mime encoded version of the messages that that have passed through the list
|
|
so each message is actually does have its full headers I believe the instances where I've seen
|
|
this that's certainly been the case I don't I haven't done a survey of what else is available
|
|
like that but I'm pretty certain that the algorithm is simply to pick up the message and stick it
|
|
into the digest as an attachment now that's actually potentially usable but again I have not come
|
|
across a male client which can do the right thing if you go to a digest you see the the messages in
|
|
it as if it's one message divided up into partitions if you say reply there's no way you can say I'd
|
|
like to reply to this message inside this message you just say reply and you would it means reply
|
|
to the message I'm currently reading that is the digest so I think that if a list is about
|
|
discussions like the hpr list is receiving digest is a problem if you ever want to reply to anything
|
|
because you can't reply to the individual messages within the digest and if you do it you will end
|
|
up with a completely unthreaded orphaned message which pretty much can't be re-threaded by the the
|
|
algorithm I was talking about earlier because the subject of the digest is hello I'm a digest
|
|
number 42 it doesn't how could it contain the subject of all of the however many messages within
|
|
so I would suggest that for a low traffic list like hpr it'd be better if you didn't subscribe to
|
|
the digest list just go for the the met one message at the time option if you do
|
|
subscribe to the digest list you're either going to have to avoid replying to anything or you're
|
|
going to have to construct messages by taking the digest and editing out the the information you need
|
|
and building a message that looks as close as possible to a reply to a message as you would have
|
|
created if you'd got the the straight message and then inject that into the system and hope that
|
|
the algorithms that that men the threads can do a job on you on what you've done I've actually seen
|
|
this written down as a as a strategy in some university where this must have been quite quite a
|
|
problem I haven't actually linked to that thing because I was yeah it just seemed so insane
|
|
personally but you may think otherwise so the next subheading here is since we've dealt
|
|
pretty much with what all I can say about threads the moment formatting the the reply is also an
|
|
issue it doesn't really affect the threading thing threadings all about using reply and so forth
|
|
to get the headers right but formatting the contents is also an issue when you're sending and
|
|
receiving messages on a mailing list I've referenced a Wikipedia article on the subject of posting
|
|
style which does go into quite a lot of depth more than I'm going into here many male clients do
|
|
offer an ability to do a fair bit of formatting on the original message when you're replying to it
|
|
and if that's available and usually it it's something you need to switch on at least in the
|
|
clients I've used then switch it on because it's it's really useful so the first piece of advice
|
|
under this heading is to quote the text that you're applying to it's it's regarded as bad etiquette
|
|
not to to mark the the original text and reply as a separate piece of text the thing that you're
|
|
applying to so normally you start this section of the message with a line that says something like
|
|
on date and time author wrote a date and time from the the original message the message you're
|
|
applying to and the author field is the the sender's name person you're applying to the text of the
|
|
original message then follows with a greater than sign and a space after in front of sorry each line
|
|
so I've got an example here I don't I can read it and convey anything useful now then if some
|
|
if a further person were to reply to that reply then a further header message would be put
|
|
introducing the the secondary reply actually be the tertiary reply and and followed by the the
|
|
thing that was in the previous message with the the greater than signs and the whole lot with
|
|
further greater than signs in front of it and the follow up text so it there's my description
|
|
doesn't do it just as hopefully you'll find the the actual thing itself looks looks better than
|
|
that most male clients will handle this for you to some reasonable degree the other factor is that
|
|
when you have this sort of original quote and then the supplementary quote and then you're about
|
|
to add your comment to that when you have that sort of structure then and you're viewing it
|
|
different male clients will give you all different types of add-ons and improvements and features
|
|
to to make it easier to read in the case of Thunderbird that I use myself there are add-ons which
|
|
will color the different levels of quote so it's easier to see you know that's the red one and
|
|
that's all together in a block and that's the blue one and so on and so forth and the one I tend
|
|
to use more than any other it collapses the quotes so the innermost quote is collapsed down with
|
|
a with a little plus sign beside it that you can click on to expand it and then the the thing
|
|
that wraps that is also collapsed down so that you can you can expand that and I've got an
|
|
example of that a bit later on in the in the notes might just make it a little clearer so the
|
|
next hint is to say to to tell you to trim the text that you're applying to so if you if the
|
|
first message was a hundred lines long and you want to reply to that and say something like
|
|
I disagree with this because blah blah blah then it's not necessary to leave the entire text
|
|
in for a start by it's beginning at the start of the thread and walking through it you will
|
|
see it anyway there's generally thought to be a good idea to leave some of it but more particularly
|
|
the bit that you're you're commenting on if there are salutations hello list and signatures at the
|
|
end and possibly a footer from the the mail system itself get them all out remove them all
|
|
the other thing you see from time to time is that people using pgp or gpg signatures will their
|
|
message will contain these you really need to remove them as well I often see these things being
|
|
left intact in a reply and it looks to the the mail client as if the reply is signed with the
|
|
originators signature which composes it enormously most mail clients to understand these types of
|
|
signatures will remove them anyway certainly I with with Thunderbird and the enigmail plugin that you
|
|
use to get to gpg signing an encryption these things are handled automatically so if your client
|
|
doesn't do this you seriously need to think of enhancing it or replacing it that would suggest
|
|
so the next the next and almost the last point is about top posting and this is if you don't
|
|
understand where it is is the practice of putting the reply before the text of the previous message
|
|
this is usually regarded as bad etiquette since it reverses the normal flow of conversation and
|
|
requires a message to be read from the bottom up so the first point is at the bottom of the message
|
|
the second that the reply to that is above it the reply to that is above that and so on and so forth
|
|
if and the worst case I would say is where there's there's a chain of replies and comments
|
|
in a message and there's been a bunch of different approaches to the way the replies formatted
|
|
some people would put the reply underneath the the original and some would put it on top
|
|
it can be extraordinarily difficult to to work out what the actual conversation was because of that
|
|
most male clients will offer the facility of positioning your text your reply after the original
|
|
text and if they do I mean Thunberg for example says do you want it before or after and select the
|
|
after I would suggest some people do feel that a top posted reply is more convenient because they
|
|
don't have to scroll past all the preceding material to read it but as I was saying before
|
|
using an email client which collapses and expands quotes a good compromise because everything but
|
|
the last part on an incoming message is collapsed and that reduces the the size and complexity of
|
|
the message as you're viewing it quite considerably in my screenshot shows a later message from the
|
|
hpr mailing list which is which came from Mike Ray in as a comment to to another message and you can see
|
|
the the thing he's commenting on is just one line with a plus and a blue bar alongside it if you
|
|
click the plus then it it opens up to the the full text that he's replying to and then the
|
|
history of life follows after that I haven't put it all in I've trimmed it down a moderate bit
|
|
I left the thread viz display in just because I thought it was rather it was another interesting
|
|
example of what it looks like I have to say though the subject of top posting is a controversial one
|
|
and it might well be in a state of flux when I was preparing this show I found a long long
|
|
discussion about the right way to apply to a mailing list on the mailman users mailing list that's
|
|
that's the mailman mailing list software I've been a subscriber to this list for many years because
|
|
I used to manage a mailman installation at the university I worked at you might want to have
|
|
to have a look for that there's some quite interesting discussions a few fair number of slightly
|
|
off topic things there but if if you're interested in this this whole issue have a look at that
|
|
because I thought that there were some very telling arguments in there one of the points that I
|
|
must imagine I maybe didn't know enough about was that many modern mail clients particularly on
|
|
phones and tablets are not using the the more standard posting style and going for top posting
|
|
in some cases people were citing instances where their mail clients did not let them edit the
|
|
the original reply in any way and certainly only allowed top posting I certainly experienced this
|
|
when I was working where when we installed installed Microsoft Mail Microsoft Outlook the posting
|
|
behavior that the that most people in the organization started to use was top posting and citing
|
|
everything all the so all of the attachments would whiz around and everybody's mailbox got
|
|
totally stuffed with these long repeated messages where where the the entirety was cited over and
|
|
over again and and that was largely down to Outlook I believe so my final point is to say use an
|
|
email client that can do the right thing as in the the Wikipedia article on posting style there's
|
|
the comment there that some mail clients aren't capable of following the the etiquette and this
|
|
is my comment Microsoft Outlook seems particularly challenged in this area so avoid it and anything
|
|
else that miss maves I do appreciate that this is not always possible however so it's a slightly
|
|
idealistic view anyway that's that's the end I hope I haven't come across as too ranty and
|
|
but I think these are some important points and in a communal setup like mailing list it's good
|
|
to conform and make world better for others okay that's it bye now
|
|
you've been listening to Hecker Public Radio at Hecker Public Radio dot org we are a community
|
|
podcast network that releases shows every weekday Monday through Friday today's show like all our
|
|
shows was contributed by an HBR listener like yourself if you ever thought of recording a podcast
|
|
then click on our contributing to find out how easy it really is Hecker Public Radio was founded
|
|
by the digital dog pound and the infonomicum computer club and it's part of the binary revolution
|
|
if you have comments on today's show please email the host directly leave a comment on the website
|
|
or record a follow-up episode yourself unless otherwise stated today's show is released on
|
|
the creative comments attribution share a live free dot org license
|