On Fri, 21 Aug 2020, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
:>>To me it was clear what Barry said, and a human can clearly identify
:>>the quoted text.
:>
:>It wouldn't be clear if those proprietary quote level indicators were
:>quoted several followups later, nor would reading order be clear given
:>that the OP changed from bottom posting to top posting, and subsequent
:>followups would be bottom posted. You didn't address that major point.
Actually, you can train your brain to read anything. It does not take much
effort to read quoted text. Don't underestimate your brain abilities.
:>I'll note that you excised the quotes with the OP's proprietary quote
:>level indicators from other precursor articles in the thread. You also
:>excised the OP's own top-posted quote.
:>
:>Eduardo, your own actions demonstrate that you agree with me, given that
:>you removed quotes that weren't clearly attributed, plus the conflicting
:>quote order.
I removed text that was not relevant to my text. Do not attribute
intentions to my actions. I keep only the text to which I am replying.
Nothing more.
:>>As long as the message is reasonably readable, I see no problem wih it.
:>
:>Readibility includes making it quite clear to the reader who wrote what,
:>and not to make additional work for anyone posting a followup, requiring
:>extra steps to make it clear who wrote what to change quote level
:>indicators back to something conventional.
You are asking for too much about readability. Readability means it can be
reasonably infered what was intended. I did, and so did you.
:>>On the other hand, I am not sure if this is the place to discuss things
:>>like this.
:>
:>I raised the issue in the thread to which it applies. My call.
Raising an issue is different than continuing to argue it. This is not the
place to raise such issues, this is the place to discuss issues abut
Alpine, not about your ideas of quoting.
:>>If you would like to discuss them further, do not hesitate to send me
:>an email. I'll be happy to defend this point.
:>
:>But your typical manner of quoting in followup when you're not
:>admonishing me clearly attributes quotes to their authors.
I agree, but I am free to change my mind at any time. I do not have to
follow what I did in the past, or accept anyone trying to tell me what to
do. That's my decision.
:>You've made your position clear previously that you don't care how
:>people format the body of their articles or the body of their email
:>messages as long as it's not nonstandard. I am well aware of your
:>stubborness on this point. I am similarly stubborn that when posting to
:>a mass medium of communication like Usenet or a mailing list,
:>attribution lines should match quote levels in a conventional manner,
:>and reading order should not be changed to a mix of bottom posting and
:>top posting.
You can be all stubborn as you would like. That is fine. Just do not post
such things in a place whose purpose is to talk about Alpine. Not about
proper quoting. I really mean it: if you want to continue this, let us d
it over email. I am happy to be called stubborn there too. Just let pepple
communicate how they feel it is appropriate. No harm was done, and you are
making people less prone to speaking because you have a strong opinion
about a trivial matter. Again, let us continue this over email please. Let
this forum be a discussion about Alpine.
:>Just because the formatting of the followup or reply isn't nonstandard
:>doesn't mean the author should do it.
I agree, I also agree to concluding that "doesn't mean the authour should
not do it".
--
Eduardo
https://tinyurl.com/yc377wlh (web)
http://repo.or.cz/alpine.git (Git)