Re: SMTP pseudocode?

On 2005-11-07, Mark Crispin <MRC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Mike Heins wrote:
>> I don't think you know what you are talking about. It was simple lack of
>> perspective and lack of use in the real world. It was not a conscious
>> design decision.
>
> I generally do know what I am talking about; at least in the field of
> messaging.
>
> I wish to know how you acquired the specific knowledge that the creation
> of top-posting interfaces was:
> . "simple lack of perspective"
> . "lack of use in the real world"
> and
> . "not a conscious design decision"
>
> I am particularly interested, as these remarkable statements conflict with
> first-hand knowledge of management decrees in this area which preceed the
> existence of Microsoft Outlook by several years.

My information came from a Microsoft employee in 1997 -- I asked him
because I was dismayed that OE placed the cursor at the top by
default. According to him it was debated not at all, and once it was
out there they got lots of feedback asking for it to be changed, but
it was not considered strongly.

You are correct that I don't actually know whether it was a conscious
design decision, just that he said there was no controversy or
discussion at the time.

According to him later a "place cursor at bottom" setting was debated --
whether it went in to Outlook or Outlook Express I don't know.

With regard to it flying in the face of Internet culture at that time,
it certainly did. Top-posting was not common on Usenet before
Outlook Express became a common agent.

If it was an intentional decision, I find it even more disgusting.

>
>> It is possible to fight that battle and win in
>> sufficiently coherent communities. The top-posting battle is won in many Usenet
>> groups and on many mailing lists. It is not to say that no top-posting
>> goes on, it is that when it does happen people say something and frequent
>> contributors conform.
>
> Who elected you to be the town sheriff?
>
> What are your qualifications for this position?

As this group apparently tolerates top-posting and Google no-context
vomiting without a whimper, I subside. I violated the principle of
listening for long enough to figure things like that out.

>
> If you're such an internet.guru why aren't you at IETF?

Never claimed to be an Internet "guru", but I will claim to have been on
Usenet for 16 years and to have written various software using the SMTP
protocol.

In most of the places I have inhabited on Usenet, top-posting is
frowned upon. I would have thought a mail group would have that as
well -- though if it is Microsoft-oriented then I could see why top-
posting is defended.

My original post was placed because my answering post was replied
to without context, which made it difficult to explain that I was
suggesting a scripting language as pseudo-code, not as an actual
tool to be used.

--
Mike Heins
Perusion -- Expert Interchange Consulting http://www.perusion.com/

Be patient. God isn't finished with me yet. -- unknown
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Email
    ... The only difference is that Outlook must be running at the time the ... Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. ... Why is top-posting such a bad thing? ... What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? ...
    (microsoft.public.outlook)
  • [OT] Top Posting
    ... Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting ... Because it is proper Usenet Etiquette. ... The most top-posts originate from the minimal work people spend on making ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Your Opinion Please: Pretentious Words & Phrases...
    ... If the reader has to go through "the whole previous post", then this is just as bad as top-posting. ... Actually the issue of correct posting to the Usenet was the subject of a paper published by the UK's Tavistock Institute about seven or eight years ago. ... But when they're presented with the simple communication conventions of the Usenet, which have evolved over quarter of a century as a global forum and therefore requires fairly dynamic thinking to work properly, they're buggered. ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: Battle of the Sidewalk ][ - error
    ... especially when folks don't bother ... Usenet no-no. ... top-posting without trimming is bad form. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Another Newbie Question - Be nice Lumpy :-)
    ... I'm not really sure what "top-posting" is, ... That's posting your response *before* the article you're ... What is the most annoying thing on Usenet? ...
    (alt.marketing.online.ebay)