Formatting a reply to be just right

[Paul H (admin)]

We seem to be having a few teething problems getting replies with just the right amount of information, so I'm moving Al's post to this new topic.

To avoid going off topic on other topics () please keep all the reply/quoting problems here.


If you use the forum to reply, it indicates which message you are replying to. Look for this line at the top of a reply:

"In reply to this post by xxxxxx"

However that is missing on the email messages and Al rightly got confused. I'm not sure if we can fix that in the emails - we can ask the Nabble developers to include that line in the emails.

In the meantime its helpful if we always start a message with the name or ID of the person that we are replying to. Usually that is enough to avoid confusion, but obviously a quote can make the message easier to understand.

cheers
Paul

[alopenboat]

On 1 Jan 2011 at 11:40, adminHBBR [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

> PS: When we reply to messages by email can we please try to remove
> the
> preceding message - there is no need to duplicate it.
>
> OR if quoting a line is important, reply via the forum and the press
> the
> Quote Original button and trim the quote down to the important
> line(s)

Can I put in a plea that, when replying, you *always* include enough
of the previous message to give context. Today I received this
message:

"I thought that might be the case but it does tick a lot of the boxes
for raiding and its very light easy to pull up onto a beach by
yourself and fast!"

Which means nothing to me as I have no idea which boat it refers to.

Whatever email software you are using it will allow you to quote and
trim the original message (and PLEASE do trim).

--
Hoping for calm nights

Alastair Law,      
Yeovil, England.
<http://www.little.jim.freeuk.com>         

[GregHBBR]

Hi Al,

alopenboat wrote

On 1 Jan 2011 at 11:40, adminHBBR [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

> PS: When we reply to messages by email can we please try to remove
> the preceding message - there is no need to duplicate it.

Can I put in a plea that, when replying, you *always* include enough
of the previous message to give context.
...
Whatever email software you are using it will allow you to quote and
trim the original message (and PLEASE do trim).

You forget one thing Al. This is not mail list! This is a forum that happens to allow email access. It is convention in a forum only to quote very sparingly, and not at all if your post appears immediately below the message to which you are responding.

Your email program should allow you to set your InBox to display in "threads" as well as date order. That should allow you to follow the context of any reply, even when there is no quoted text. Yes, Nabble does properly thread messages, providing they haven't been moved around the forum!

(As you see, I'm not totally against quoting and we seem to be as one in agreeing that what is extremely bad practice is to append an entire previous message to your reply. It is not necessary, on either a forum or mail list!)

[Mark Harvey]

GregHBBR wrote

Hi Al,

alopenboat wrote

On 1 Jan 2011 at 11:40, adminHBBR [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

> PS: When we reply to messages by email can we please try to remove
> the preceding message - there is no need to duplicate it.

Can I put in a plea that, when replying, you *always* include enough
of the previous message to give context.
...
Whatever email software you are using it will allow you to quote and
trim the original message (and PLEASE do trim).

You forget one thing Al. This is not mail list! This is a forum that happens to allow email access. It is convention in a forum only to quote very sparingly, and not at all if your post appears immediately below the message to which you are responding.

Your email program should allow you to set your InBox to display in "threads" as well as date order. That should allow you to follow the context of any reply, even when there is no quoted text. Yes, Nabble does properly thread messages, providing they haven't been moved around the forum!

(As you see, I'm not totally against quoting and we seem to be as one in agreeing that what is extremely bad practice is to append an entire previous message to your reply. It is not necessary, on either a forum or mail list!)

I see your point of view Al and had I realised how this works would have worded my comment better but as I was replying within the context of the forum had not even thought of how it would be seen in an e-mail.

[alopenboat]

On 1 Jan 2011 at 13:33, adminHBBR [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

 

> The forum indicates which message you are replying to. Look for this
> line at
> the top of a reply:
>
> "In reply to this post by xxxxxx"
>
> However that is missing on the email messages and Al rightly got
> confused.
> I'm not sure if we can fix that in the emails - we can ask the
> Nabble
> developers to include that line in the emails.

That's no good, there is no point in getting the messages by email if
I have to log onto the web site to find out what it is talking about.
 
> In the meantime its helpful if we always start a message with the
> name or ID
> of the person that we are replying to. Usually that is enough to
> avoid
> confusion, but obviously a quote can make the message easier to
> understand.

Ideally any message should stand alone, containing enough information
to be self explanatory. I thought part of the reason for moving from
Yahoo was to make it easier to follow the threads. If I have to
search for references to make sense of a message I shall just pass
over it and move on to the next (which might mean you miss out on my
insightful comments :-0).

--
Hoping for calm nights

Alastair Law,      
Yeovil, England.
<http://www.little.jim.freeuk.com>          

[GregHBBR]

Hi Al,

On 01 Jan 11 22:25 "alopenboat [via UK HBBR Forum]"
<[hidden email]> said:
> That's no good, there is no point in getting the messages by email
> if I have to log onto the web site to find out what it is talking
> about.

There is no problem.

Paul's suggestion that emailed posts should have an "In reply To" line
is also unecessary. The information is included in the message's
headers and any worthwhile email program will thread the message
appropriately.

> Ideally any message should stand alone, containing enough
> information to be self explanatory.

I disagree! But change your line to read "any thread should stand
alone" and I would agree.

Greg Chapman
http://www.gregafloat.plus.com
A Boating Biography
http://www.seahawk17.plus.com
Celebrating the SeaHawk!

[alopenboat]

On 1 Jan 2011 at 14:17, Mark Harvey [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

 
> I see your point of view Al and had I realised how this works would
> have
> worded my comment better but as I was replying within the context of
> the
> forum had not even thought of how it would be seen in an e-mail.

It's not your fault, it is a function of the new forum. I shall
probably just have to live with it and just skim the messages for any
that are self explanatory.

--
Hoping for calm nights

Alastair Law,      
Yeovil, England.
<http://www.little.jim.freeuk.com>         

[alopenboat]

On 1 Jan 2011 at 14:04, GregHBBR [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

> alopenboat wrote:
> >
> > Can I put in a plea that, when replying, you *always* include
> enough
> > of the previous message to give context.
> > ...
 
> You forget one thing Al. This is not mail list! This is a forum that
> happens
> to allow email access. It is convention in a forum only to quote
> very
> sparingly, and not at all if your post appears immediately below the
> message
> to which you are responding.
>
> Your email program should allow you to set your InBox to display
> in
> "threads" as well as date order.

I read many Yahoo groups, not long ago it was over 30. So as not to
fill up my hard disc with idle chatter I routinely delete messages
after I have read them (unless they contain something specifically
worth keeping). This rather cocks up the idea of displaying them in
threads. It also would seem rather perverse to keep all the messages
on my own machine when they are already stored on the web site.

I am probably out of step here and must accept that I will not be
able to participate as with a Yahoo group.

--
Hoping for calm nights

Alastair Law,      
Yeovil, England.
<http://www.little.jim.freeuk.com>         

[gregandginas]

alopenboat wrote

I am probably out of step here and must accept that I will not be
able to participate as with a Yahoo group.

Every e-mail that comes in from ANY messageboard contains a link that allows you to see the post in context on the forum: one click gets you ALL the context, and the option of responding using all the forum tools (for embedding photos, links and the like).

In several years of subscribing to both Yahoo Groups and forums I've found forums HUGELY advantageous: you may not see the advantages immediately, but in time (as you go back to search the online resource) I'm confident that you will appreciate the step forward that has taken place!

[alopenboat]

On 1 Jan 2011 at 15:06, gregandginas [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:
 
> In several years of subscribing to both Yahoo Groups and forums I've
> found
> forums HUGELY advantageous: you may not see the advantages
> immediately, but
> in time (as you go back to search the online resource) I'm confident
> that
> you will appreciate the step forward that has taken place!

I expect you are right though, in my role as grumpy old man, I do
regret that these days "improvements" generally mean a loss of
existing capability.

Your example of an improved online search is of no comfort to me as,
when using Yahoo, I can think of no occasion when an online search
has been required (though I can see how it might become essential
with the new forum) as I tend to store useful posts on my own
machine. As these usually contain the background posts they are
complete in themselves and need no further searching.

Have a happy and progressive new year.

--
Hoping for calm nights

Alastair Law,      
Yeovil, England.
<http://www.little.jim.freeuk.com>         

[Paul H (admin)]

Greg, Al,

Is there any chance you can edit your post Subject to "Re: Formatting a reply......" to avoid confusion with the original topic name.

Normally moderators do that when they move posts (like I did) but unlike other forums Nabble does not allow moderators to edit posts.

When that is done once or twice future replies will pick up the new topic name automatically and the email titles will be less confusing.

Thanks,
Paul