| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)" <postgresql(at)mailpen(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Scott Honaker <scott(dot)n7ss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Grant Hopper <kb7wsd(at)gmail(dot)com>, Erik Robins <erik(dot)robins(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: bottom / top posting |
| Date: | 2021-06-09 22:04:47 |
| Message-ID: | 1511043.1623276287@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)" <postgresql(at)mailpen(dot)com> writes:
> Top-posting has been the predominantly common practice in the business &
> government world for decades, & it is easy to adapt to.
The reason why the old-timers around here are sticky about this is that
we believe we are writing for the mailing list archives. Gmail-style
quoting is indeed the appropriate amount of effort for throwaway threads
that only a few people will read and (probably) none of them will consult
again later. But for threads that (a) will be read by hundreds or
thousands of people right now, and (b) will be searched for in the project
archives some unknowable number of times in future, it is worth spending
extra effort to make the conversation easy to follow.
I realize that a lot of posters to these lists can't be bothered to
save a few seconds of my time. That's fine; I tend to stop reading
their messages right away.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Browder | 2021-06-09 22:10:57 | Re: bottom / top posting |
| Previous Message | Dean Gibson (DB Administrator) | 2021-06-09 21:41:47 | Re: bottom / top posting |