Re: Move junkmail to deleted

"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]" wrote in message news:O3ypf4KjIHA.748@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


And I will keep calling you on usenet *rule* rather than usenet *suggestions* - see your precious RFCs for a hint.


--- REPLY SEPARATOR ---
Only required because above poster used QUOTED-PRINTABLE format.
When posting to newsgroups, do NOT use quoted-printable format.
* Not all NNTP clients handle quoted-printable format.
- Some users still use console-mode (non-GUI) NNTP clients.
- The long lines may not wrap properly.
- Scrolling is needed if the long line does not get wrapped.
- The long line may get truncated at the window's width.
- Quoted-printable format uses special character sequences for
logical formatting. View the raw source of your post. Text-
only clients may show that encoding when viewing your post.
* Quoting levels get mangled, especially for multiple replies.
* In replies, there is no clear delineation of content.
- Cannot tell what content is from the original poster and
what is from the respondent.
- Makes impossible to determine who said what when a reply
inserts comments inline with the quoted content.
---[end of comments]---


And as long as you use quoted-printable format, I will have to continue using a reply delimiter line to differentiate your content from mine in my reply. Otherwise, how do YOU suggest differentiating between the original content in quoted-printable format from someone replies? Guess maybe? My reply delimiter also includes the reasons why quoted-printable format is stupid and inconsiderate for Usenet posting.

Regarding the RFCs, quoted-printable is defined how to use it when composing a message. There is no RFC regarding how newsreaders will handle it when replying to posts that use it.

So why aren't you violating other Usenet standards (whether de facto, like a sigdash line for a signature which is NOT specified by RFC, or by RFC)? I see you aren't posting in HTML format. Why is that, huh?

I can see that we will pretty much agree to disagree. However, when replying to quoted-printable formatted posts, some means most be used to differentiate between original and reply content. I use a reply separator line. Of course, that doesn't help when trying to insert the reply inline with the original content, so sometimes I have to add the quoting character that you and others like you, especially Google Groupers, omit because of using quoted-printable format. You really want to lump yourself in with the [lack of] netiquette exhibited by Google Groupers?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: IE has restricted content
    ... OE has problems trying to quote the content of posts where: ... I think quoted-printable is supposed to work within an NNTP client if ... implement the RFC). ... "format=flowed" parameter when quoted-printable format is used. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Move junkmail to deleted
    ... Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. ... | And I will keep calling you on usenet *rule* rather than usenet ... | Only required because above poster used QUOTED-PRINTABLE format. ... There is no RFC regarding how newsreaders will ...
    (microsoft.public.outlook)
  • Re: Questions About Moderators and Spam
    ... it violates usenet RfCs such as RfC1036. ... How does Google Groups violate RFC 1036? ... By mungling headers, i.e. castrating From: and Reply-To: and by not honoring ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Re.Lots of cycles lots of lids
    ... RFC 1855 page 4, applied to newsgroups by section 3.0. ... As I've already stated, three people with many, many, years of USENET ... original text was set to 80 characters or over. ... But even quoting you to a single level the lines are above 80 chars. ...
    (uk.rec.cycling)
  • Re: looking for hardware source
    ... In the early days of USENET, ... An RFC is not a rule. ... A REQUEST FOR COMMENT is not a set of guidelines or rules. ... can also go counter to your precious opinion of how things should be ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)