Re: Dual NIC Routing
- From: Thorsten Kampe <thorsten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 10:45:26 -0000
* Ace Fekay [MVP] (Wed, 9 Jan 2008 23:38:58 -0500)
In news:5E20EEDF-3909-47FF-AF1E-B368592328F2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Lee <Lee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> typed:
FYI it would be nice if when replying to these that the original
text be deleted so that only the reply is visible.
You're the first to complaing about not snipping out text. I usually
hear complaints about bottom posting vs top posting.
I find it useful to at least see what someone is replying to and
would be netetiquette.. Sometimes when folks snip the whole thing as
you are doing, they may be replying to a different post in the
thread and their answer makes no sense. If I see what they were
replying to, then it would make sense. Keeping the whole thread in a
post is of course no netetiquette.
I like to snip the extraneous and only leave what I am replying to.
This makes more sense.
Definitely. And most reasonable people agree about that (at least
those who care about communication). Top versus bottom posting is
simply a question or preference to read the whole thing "in
order"/chronologically. Reading the answer before the question is a
bit weird for human beings.
Thorsten
.
- References:
- Re: Dual NIC Routing
- From: Bill Grant
- Re: Dual NIC Routing
- From: Bill Grant
- Re: Dual NIC Routing
- From: Ace Fekay [MVP]
- Re: Dual NIC Routing
- Prev by Date: RE: DC access with NAT and Public IP
- Next by Date: Compromised Server? Anyone recognize the suspect Services?
- Previous by thread: Re: Dual NIC Routing
- Next by thread: Re: About WINS and browsing
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|