Netiquette - PLEASE SNIP WHAT YOU ARE NOT RESPONDING TO

I've just read a post that was 121 lines long, according to my
newsreader, and contained quoted text from ten previous posts. The
original text that was added to the bottom of this post as a reply
consisted of... two words.

Only the last two posts in the thread - only a couple of lines each -
needed to have been quoted for that two-word reply to make sense.
Instead, the poster who wrote this and everyone else in the subthread
had simply been adding on their replies without snipping a thing.

This sort of thing happens ALL THE TIME on here. I am willing to hazard
a guess that if we added up the amount of bandwidth taken up on this
group by spammers and the amount taken up by people who do not snip the
parts of previous posts that they are not actually responding to, the
latter would probably account for more wasted bandwidth on here. This
takes up people's time unnecessarily. Since not everyone has broadband
and not everyone lives in a country where local phone calls are free, it
also takes up some people's money. For these reasons, it is considered
a pretty basic part of Good Netiquette 101 to take the few extra seconds
to snip whatever parts of your quoted post you are not responding to.
Can people please, for the love of whatever, start doing this?

I realise I'm being grouchy here, but this is a longstanding problem on
this group among people who should really know better, and it has been
driving me nuts for ages.


All the best,

Sarah
--
http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com

"That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be" - P. C. Hodgell

I realise I'm being grouchy here, but this is a longstanding problem on
this group among people who should really know better, and it has been
driving me nuts for ages.

So I guess the capitals were because you really were shouting ;-)

It bugs me too, but then so does top posting, I'm on another group where
most people top post AND leave everything in, then claim it's ok they
left everything in because you didn't have to wade through it and no one
has shouted very hard about slow or costly connections. Others even
claim it's a good thing the original message and replies are there,
because some servers aren't reliable!

I've also heard the argument about top posting as being helpful for
blind and partially sighted users who use an automated reader - that's a
tough one to argue, but is an even stronger argument against posting at
the bottom of a long message.

Posting with none of the previous message often works ok if you are
using a threaded reader, but the prevalence of non threaded readers is
so high, it become less straightforward.

The thing I find most annoying about a message right at the bottom is
the strain it places on my finger from scrolling!

Anne

In article , Sarah Vaughan says...

I've just read a post that was 121 lines long, according to my
newsreader, and contained quoted text from ten previous posts. The
original text that was added to the bottom of this post as a reply
consisted of... two words.

Only the last two posts in the thread - only a couple of lines each -
needed to have been quoted for that two-word reply to make sense.
Instead, the poster who wrote this and everyone else in the subthread
had simply been adding on their replies without snipping a thing.

This sort of thing happens ALL THE TIME on here. I am willing to hazard
a guess that if we added up the amount of bandwidth taken up on this
group by spammers and the amount taken up by people who do not snip the
parts of previous posts that they are not actually responding to, the
latter would probably account for more wasted bandwidth on here. This
takes up people's time unnecessarily. Since not everyone has broadband
and not everyone lives in a country where local phone calls are free, it
also takes up some people's money. For these reasons, it is considered
a pretty basic part of Good Netiquette 101 to take the few extra seconds
to snip whatever parts of your quoted post you are not responding to.
Can people please, for the love of whatever, start doing this?

I realise I'm being grouchy here, but this is a longstanding problem on
this group among people who should really know better, and it has been
driving me nuts for ages.


All the best,

Sarah

What she said.

Banty gdr

On Mar 16, 1:29 am, Sarah Vaughan wrote:
I've just read a post that was 121 lines long, according to my
newsreader, and contained quoted text from ten previous posts. The
original text that was added to the bottom of this post as a reply
consisted of... two words.

Only the last two posts in the thread - only a couple of lines each -
needed to have been quoted for that two-word reply to make sense.
Instead, the poster who wrote this and everyone else in the subthread
had simply been adding on their replies without snipping a thing.

This sort of thing happens ALL THE TIME on here. I am willing to hazard
a guess that if we added up the amount of bandwidth taken up on this
group by spammers and the amount taken up by people who do not snip the
parts of previous posts that they are not actually responding to, the
latter would probably account for more wasted bandwidth on here. This
takes up people's time unnecessarily. Since not everyone has broadband
and not everyone lives in a country where local phone calls are free, it
also takes up some people's money. For these reasons, it is considered
a pretty basic part of Good Netiquette 101 to take the few extra seconds
to snip whatever parts of your quoted post you are not responding to.
Can people please, for the love of whatever, start doing this?

I realise I'm being grouchy here, but this is a longstanding problem on
this group among people who should really know better, and it has been
driving me nuts for ages.

All the best,

Sarah
--http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com

"That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be" - P. C. Hodgell

Me too!

regards...