![[TEST] Document Foundation Community](https://communitytest.documentfoundation.org/images/discourse-logo-sketch.png){kind=logo}
And let's notice it's a bit longer than de 4 lines of the usual Netiquette..
The headers state that you are using "YahooMailClassic/14.0.5
YahooMailWebService/0.8.113.315625"
That is not an email client.
It is, sorry. It's a web based MUA.
That is an online web mail service (and a
very poor one. Gmail works much better).
But Gmail's is also poor.
Do you even know what's a "standard"?
When it happens occasionally or less, you're right. But, if too many people don't follow the rules, for anything, then it becomes a big deal.
I have always thought it was as Larry describes. But a couple of Wikipedia articles agree with you.
Dang, something new to remember! 
Right now, I trimmed and bottom posted: You can quickly see my answer.
I could have just removed all you text, if you nedded to read it, you load the precedent message. That's all about.
md= ???
You'll also notice that my reply doesn't have an additional set of
brackets, so in-line commenting makes it very difficult to know what
is new comment and what is from the previous message.
From Dennis' message headers:
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Yeah, that's a problem with Outlook, it wants to force top-posting and
screw attribution so hard that it becomes harder to understand who wrote
what.
Even if Outlook users plan to use top-posting, Outlook-QuoteFix is still
a good way to get rid of some problems with quoting and attribution
lines, including the broken reindentation.
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/
(Disclaimer: I didn't try this. My system is not even able to run
Outlook, let alone having it installed.)
PS: It is often handy to see the answer first. I can quickly
determine whether or not I care what the question is.
Forty-two.
And if I know
what the general run of a thread has been, I don't need to see the
rest of the message except to check for blankety-blank inline but
unannounced comments.
Well, I don't think anything without a preceding attribution mark is
"unannounced", at least before the first line with "-- "...
I guess some people who don't know the rules and aren't used to mailing
lists (which includes looking for guidelines before posting) are people
who would rather subscribe through a web interface.
An idea would be, while keeping the usual mailing list stuff (the
ability to subscribe by sending an email to a specified address and so
on), having a web subscription interface that would drive the user
through two or three slides concisely explaining some important rules,
and how to unsubscribe.
Of course /then/ some people would skip the slides...
With all due respect Tom, the problem is you and the tools you've chosen
to use for replying to newsgroups. Yahoo Mail just plain sucks and
doesn't properly do anything right for places like this.I think that single paragraph explains why this thread has become so
heated. YOU are reading this list on a NEWSGROUP. But the list is also
available as a EMAIL LIST and an archive of that same EMAIL LIST on
Nabble. I would hazard a guess that the vast majority are subscribed to
the email list or view it on Nabble, and as such consider it as an
email list and not a newsgroup.
You've brought up a point, Dave, I hadn't thought of. I do use the Gmane interface.
Since you mentioned Nabble, it once again made me wonder if the display there was a mirror to the list I see in Thunderbird, so I checked. And it is. Which is the way I would organize an online help system. I am suspecting that by using folders and threading in Thunderbird, I could accomplish a very similar display. But I would have to constantly delete the email to have some free space on the hard drive!
When I get some time, aka after the summer work season is over, I'll have to remember to take a more in depth look at the Nabble interface.
Newsgroup people have shown over the years to have different practices
than emailers. Bottom posters probably predominate, also the practice
of long quotes seems far more prevalent there. And noting the comments
about threading, most newsgroup readers do it via the header
information. Email clients do it in various ways and I suspect Pegasus
is far from unique in doing if from the subject line - and many email
programs have never heard of threading...
I used to use my Yahoo account regularly, but am dropping it. I don't remember it being able to thread either, but it does have filters to direct mail to folders.
I do receive a number of lists via newsgroups, using Gravity. But I by
far prefer email so this is my chosen option for this list.
Gravity??? The messages just fall out of the sky???
My apologies, I just couldn't resist!
We are never going to agree on these issues due the huge differences in
opinion between the newsgroup, email and forum people. So let us close
these threads immediately and accept our differences.
The users don't have to agree. LO needs to set up something more official in the way of netiquette than what they have now. And regardless of which interface is used, i.e. the mailing list, Nabble, or Gmane, require and enforce the netiquette rules they develop.
Uhmmmmm, Tom Davies wrote that. 
I will respect your wishes about posting at the bottom. I live in the US. I do a lot of work e-mails in my job, and receive a lot of work e-mails. I never receive any e-mails where people reply to me at the bottom. The reply is always at the top. I never understood why Thunderbird had the default to reply at the bottom when Thunderbird came out. It was backwards!!!!!! So I have always changed the default on every system I've installed it on. Maybe there are different customs in different countries.
Work emails are a bit different to technical mailing lists.
In a technical mailing list like this there may be an original question followed by several replies followed by more questions etc etc and if you top post as default then A) the thread of the discussion gets completely messed up and b) do you read a book from the bottom up?
e.g.
Q: Why top post?
I've often thought of something similar, i.e. when a use registers/signs up, that use automatically gets a document sent to the user's registered email address. And then have the user acknowledge the user has received and understands the posting rules, netiquette, etc.. Something similar to having to agree to a EULA when installing software. When the user gets his/her post pulled for not following they guidelines (I'm assuming continuing errors in posting, not the occasional error where the user may have had a simple brain lapse ) they can't claim they didn't know.
And... You could create said document in LO! :
: But sending the user a PDF would be better.
No, the idea here is exactly to force users through small[1] explanations
*before* they subscribe. That is, said web subscription wouldn't be made
until the user finished the small "slideshow". And to avoid overdoing
it, it should be in plain HTML.
[1] "small" means it shouldn't be the entire contents of RFC 1855 and
additional guidelines, just a simple set of rules.
(And actually, I think sending it as a PDF instead of a plain text
e-mail would be a bad idea. If you're sending it by e-mail, why not just
put it in the e-mail? PDFs aren't good for on-screen reading, anyway.)
Even if the user wants to skip it, they still has to skip each "slide"
to get to the submit form.
Also, a key feature would be that users who are already used to mailing
lists and find the subscription email can easily skip this and subscribe
by mail.
How Does one get off this list? I have done everything suggested and still my email box is filled with discussions I have no interest in. I asked one question got no help. PLEASE take me off the list!
I guess some people who don't know the rules and aren't used to mailing
lists (which includes looking for guidelines before posting) are people
who would rather subscribe through a web interface.An idea would be, while keeping the usual mailing list stuff (the
ability to subscribe by sending an email to a specified address and so
on), having a web subscription interface that would drive the user
through two or three slides concisely explaining some important rules,
and how to unsubscribe.Of course /then/ some people would skip the slides...
I've often thought of something similar, i.e. when a use
registers/signs up, that use automatically gets a document sent to the
user's registered email address. And then have the user acknowledge
the user has received and understands the posting rules, netiquette,
etc.. Something similar to having to agree to a EULA when installing
software. When the user gets his/her post pulled for not following
they guidelines (I'm assuming continuing errors in posting, not the
occasional error where the user may have had a simple brain lapse
) they can't claim they didn't know.And... You could create said document in LO! :
the user a PDF would be better.
No, the idea here is exactly to force users through small[1] explanations
*before* they subscribe. That is, said web subscription wouldn't be made
until the user finished the small "slideshow". And to avoid overdoing
it, it should be in plain HTML.
[1] "small" means it shouldn't be the entire contents of RFC 1855 and
additional guidelines, just a simple set of rules.
(And actually, I think sending it as a PDF instead of a plain text
e-mail would be a bad idea. If you're sending it by e-mail, why not just
put it in the e-mail? PDFs aren't good for on-screen reading, anyway.)
Even if the user wants to skip it, they still has to skip each "slide"
to get to the submit form.
Also, a key feature would be that users who are already used to mailing
lists and find the subscription email can easily skip this and subscribe
by mail.
To get off this list, you have to *unsubscribe*. Instructions for that
have been appended to ALL MESSAGES IN ALL THE DISCUSSIONS THAT HAVE BEEN
FILLING YOUR E-MAIL BOX, and yet you managed to ignore
that. Congratulations.
Heck, your message even arrived here with *two* of these list
signatures. Go read it to see the instructions. X-ray glasses are not
needed.
You can also look into the message headers for the unsubscribe address.
Unsubscription is done *exactly* as subscription.
(Now please just tell me you're joking. You're trolling, right? I can
see the hidden cameras...)
I'm not going to quote the signature, because this message will just get
a brand new list signature below, you see, after my gopherhole address:
Dave Douglas wrote (09-09-11 18:25)
How Does one get off this list? I have done everything suggested and
still my email box is filled with discussions I have no interest in. I
asked one question got no help. PLEASE take me off the list!
The same way as you subscribed, only the effect is in the opposite direction 
I guess some people who don't know the rules and aren't used to mailing
lists (which includes looking for guidelines before posting) are people
who would rather subscribe through a web interface.An idea would be, while keeping the usual mailing list stuff (the
ability to subscribe by sending an email to a specified address and so
on), having a web subscription interface that would drive the user
through two or three slides concisely explaining some important rules,
and how to unsubscribe.Of course /then/ some people would skip the slides...
I've often thought of something similar, i.e. when a use
registers/signs up, that use automatically gets a document sent to the
user's registered email address. And then have the user acknowledge
the user has received and understands the posting rules, netiquette,
etc.. Something similar to having to agree to a EULA when installing
software. When the user gets his/her post pulled for not following
they guidelines (I'm assuming continuing errors in posting, not the
occasional error where the user may have had a simple brain lapse
) they can't claim they didn't know.And... You could create said document in LO! :
the user a PDF would be better.No, the idea here is exactly to force users through small[1] explanations
*before* they subscribe. That is, said web subscription wouldn't be made
until the user finished the small "slideshow". And to avoid overdoing
it, it should be in plain HTML.
I took your slide idea backwards. I read it as *after* you subscribed, you would see the slides. Having it before, as a simplified explanation of what is expected, is a great idea.
As is plain and simple HTML. I took a introductory web class one time, and it was mentioned that too many pages get too "busy", making it hard to find the pertinent information you are looking for.
[1] "small" means it shouldn't be the entire contents of RFC 1855 and
additional guidelines, just a simple set of rules.
Agreed.
(And actually, I think sending it as a PDF instead of a plain text
e-mail would be a bad idea. If you're sending it by e-mail, why not just
put it in the e-mail? PDFs aren't good for on-screen reading, anyway.)
I always take ideas like this, and view them from the perspective a new, inexperience user with a lack of knowledge about X. That being said...
I would submit that any simple set of guidelines that would be included in your slides would be insufficient to provide the information to many, if not most, new users. I don't think most of the younger users would have a clue as to how to properly write a post.
Until the new users are given *all* requirements of proper posting, you will be asking for problems and confusion.
I would include most if not all of the Netmeister's "Learn to Quote" pages in said document. Too many times I've seen rules posted with absolutely no justification or explanation as to why the rule was put in effect. When I've come up against this, I've usually gone away irritated to say the least. But, when I know *why* the rule is in effect, it usually sheds new light on the reason for the rule.
Not only should we provide the new user with the rules, we should provide the reasons/justifications for the rules as an education for the inexperienced. "Old salts" can simply skip the reading.
I learned more about posting to newsgroups from that article than I'd ever managed to learn before. And while I've not been able to do much with newsgroups over the years, I have been using computers since the 8-bit days.
Many people don't know how to use any mail client properly, would they even know how to deal with the email other than read it online? And something that is simply put in the body of the email cannot be comprehensive, well formatted, or even professional looking.
By attaching a PDF file, you can put the information in a file that includes the LO "look and feel" of the documentation for LO. Also, as most of the less knowledgeable users may have difficulty in printing and/or downloading the email itself, I suspect most know how to download attachments.
Alternatively, you could provide a link to the document that would automatically download it.
<snip>
Hi
Many apologies for the rude and unhelpful tone of previous replies! Also many apologies that your original problem couldn't be answered A quick copy&paste from the guidelines
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
really doesn't take long.
"
Check which e-mail address you subscribed to the list
People sometimes report that they are having problems un-subscribing
from a list. Sometimes, the reason is simply that they are not sending
the un-subscription request from the same e-mail address that they
originally used to sign-up. If you have multiple e-mail addresses and
are no longer sure what address you used when you subscribed, please
look at the headers of a message from the list (look for a button or
link such as "Details" or "Raw Message" or "Original Message" in your
e-mail program or web-mail page). Your e-mail address will be listed in
the "Delivered-To" entry or the "Return-Path" entry, such as
illustrated below:
Delivered-To: john.doe@example.com
[...]
Return-Path: <users-bounces-1234-john.doe=example.com@global.libreoffice.org>
Notice that in the "Return-Path", your address is embedded in another address, and the "@" is replaced by "=".
"
Hopefully that helpsGood luck and regards fromTom