[25011] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 7261 Volume: 10
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Sat Oct 16 11:11:55 2004
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Sat, 16 Oct 2004 Volume: 10 Number: 7261
Today's topics:
Re: Top posting (was Re: Concatenating an array into on (Anno Siegel)
Re: Top posting (was Re: Concatenating an array into on <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it>
Re: Top posting (was Re: Concatenating an array into on <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it>
Re: Top posting (was Re: Concatenating an array into on <lawshouse.public@btconnect.com>
Re: Top posting (was Re: Concatenating an array into on <notvalid@email.com>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 16 Oct 2004 12:11:29 GMT
From: anno4000@lublin.zrz.tu-berlin.de (Anno Siegel)
Subject: Re: Top posting (was Re: Concatenating an array into one string?)
Message-Id: <ckr35h$af3$1@mamenchi.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE>
Austin P. So (Hae Jin) <who@what.where> wrote in comp.lang.perl.misc:
>
>
> Anno Siegel wrote:
> > Austin P. So (Hae Jin) <who@what.where> wrote in comp.lang.perl.misc:
>
> >>I really don't understand the fascist notion that things must be done a
> >>certain way in order to belong to the newsgroup community.
>
> > Some countries go so far as to force their hapless citizens by law
> > to drive on one paricular side of the road. Fascists! Bomb them,
> > I say.
>
> Seriously, do you honestly believe that this is proper analogy? Laws
> created to preserve the life and safety of citizens are placed on the
> same scale as the maintenance of "stylistic merit"?
Yes, it's a good analogy.
Foremost, the analogy shows that there can be massive advantages in
preferring, even enforcing, a rule that may look arbitrary to someone
not acquainted with the territory. That is independent of the serious-
ness of consequences if the rule is broken.
Secondly, driving on one side of the road is not to make traffic safer,
it is to make traffic possible. Roads would probably be safer in the
permanent congestion if everyone drove where they liked. Similarly,
deciding on one posting style makes long exchanges on Usenet *possible*.
A thread where people alternately top-post and interleave is unreadable.
That's more than stylistic merit, it's functionality.
The analogy is bad only in that it assumes the choice is between equally
well-suited alternatives. The left and right side of the road are in
fact equally well suited for traffic -- myths about the sword-hand side
discounted.
In contrast, interleaved (and bottom-) posting follow the flow of
reading from top to bottom, whereas top posting goes against it.
All cultures, living or dead, read and write top to bottom, and there
are reasons for that too. Try to make, literally, heads and tails of
a posting that contains two or three top-posted followups. It isn't
as bad as a mixed thread, but it gets pretty bad soon.
Interleaved posting is continuable, in the sense that you can
continuously delete and add material and still provide enough
context so that every posting in the thread can be read in one
go. No other style offers that.
> Hmmm...that reminds me:
>
> ====
> Reuters(AP)
[well-written, but badly aimed parody snipped]
Anno
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 15:19:46 +0200
From: Michele Dondi <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it>
Subject: Re: Top posting (was Re: Concatenating an array into one string?)
Message-Id: <0b22n09ai2vm08v1c2hbafg5dgeta3skqa@4ax.com>
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 22:27:42 -0700, "Austin P. So (Hae Jin)"
<who@what.where> wrote:
>Michele Dondi wrote:
>> [Note: top-posted version, for illustrative purposes only!]
>
>I'm sorry, this kind of top-posting lacks any sort of stylistic sense.
Granted! I deliberately exaggerated in that direction: this was meant
as a provocation.
While we're at it, you may have answered the non-top-posted version
instead...
>In short, your illustration sucks big time...
I'm not contending this, as it definitely sucks, the key point being
IMHO that while it sucks particularly hard, it simply magnifies the
fact that top-posting sucks per se, *always*.
>> BULLSHIT!
>
>Oh my!
>
>> Don't abuse words you probably don't have the slightest
>> comprehension about.
>
>Sure sure...maybe then you shouldn't blindly scream out "bullshit",
>unless you actually know what you are talking about?
Of course out of context it doesn't make much sense. I guess you *did*
understand that I was referring to this claim of yours:
HJ>I really don't understand the fascist notion that things must be
^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^
HJ>done a certain way in order to belong to the newsgroup community.
Now, think what you like, you're *abusing* that word. My cmt can't be
but a repeated, shouted "BULLSHIT"! As one who tries to enforce the
good practice of quoting properly I've felt personally *insulted* by
your words, for there's nothing, I say *nothing* I hate like fascism.
For one thing is to enforce something that is quite natural to regard
as a good practice (possibly including in this the good will to please
those whose help we're looking for) and one thing is to enforce the
overwhelming of men over men, which constitutes a fascists' thing.
Please let me explain: I live in a country (Italy) in which there's
people who only yesterday were still saying "boia chi molla!", and now
they are at the governement.
In my country, in my city, in my life we all live the effects of
what's been wittily described as "fascismo discreto della borghesia",
and things are getting worse and worse.
Last year a man, a father of a young girl, was *murdered* by a family
of self-declared fascists who used to go round with a dog called
Rommel, a family of motherfuckers who kept their house full of fascist
symbols and objects of all kinds. And I bet they won't get one tenth
of the punishment that is given to, say, squatters prosecuted for
disorders during demonstrations.
A group of comrades is being prosecuted, and risks severe (possibly
detentive) penalties for having done an act of Resistance on the 25th
of April, the day we celebrate the Liberation of our country, the day
celebrating Resistance itself. For having prevented a group of
criminals from performing a provocative insulting act of the maximum
severity: bringing flowers to were Mussolini was hung! But police
didn't take care of stopping them from doing such a crime: they
preferred to protect the poor boys from the rage of the mob!!
This very summer there have been many stabbings and other aggressions
by nazis. And it seems that they have if not excatly "protection" from
the police, at least they're being reserved a preferred treatment. It
seems at all effects that there's a precise political will to suppress
the seed and the breath of Resistance in this city, and in this
country.
I could go on and on ad nauseam with the revolting things going on in
my country, not to mention the human lives, the tortures, the blood
poured in the name of fascism.
>You see...I occasionally top-post, but I would never do it unless it
>made sense.
Fine!
However it is *my experience* (admittedly limited) that in many years
it made sense for me at most once or twice. OTOH I *do* quote properly
even where top-posting is tolerated as a common practice (e.g.
alt.windows*: yes, I happened to need their help! ;-)
>Of course, no one should ever reply to a post point by point by
>top-posting, unless you can summarize it in one thought. And if you are
I agree, but then the point is that even in the case one is addressing
the whole sense of a post or that of a post short enough to be
addressed in one single point, well even in these cases one could
quote properly equally well. So why not just doing it?!?
>redirecting the exchange, then it also makes sense to top-post as an
>introduction.
I doubt that many people will think that adding a small part of
original content at the top of a post as an introduction would qualify
as "top-posting".
By "top-posting" it is generally intended to quote a whole post
(possibly very long) and add one's own cmts at the top of it. It
plainly doesn't make sense.
>> But seriously this (Godwin's law) painting one's rhetorical
>> opponents as Nazis is an odious and verminous ploy normally used,
>> as here, to mask the intellectual bankruptcy of one's arguments.
>> - Robin Chapman in sci.math
>>
>> (couldn't find better words to express about your idiotic cmt)
>
>I liked BULLSHIT better...
>
>Sorry...your quote of a quote on the application of "Godwin's law", is
>in of itself bankrupt because more often than not, people like you
>invoke it as an easy excuse to get out an argument.
BULLSHIT! Sorry: I'm not getting out of this argument! I don't need no
fucked up excuse. Also wtf does it matter what "people like me" do? Do
care what *I* do. Especially since... wtf do you know about how
"people like me" is?
At least I had the good taste not to call you a fascist, especially
since I hardly know anything about you. Sadly enough the little I
know, that is the words I read, makes me think you're behaving in a
fascist way yourself, in particular for how easy it is for you to
categorize people and give them names. ("people like you", etc.)
>> It's just the desire (that can become an actual *need*, taking into
>> account traffic/time considerations) to keep communication
>> *efficient*.
>
>There is "efficiency", and then there is blind adherence to what is
>perceived as "efficiency" by those who are unable to understand the
As most people here has been repeating over and over, top-posting is
tolerated from newbies who hardly know about it (and possible
alternatives).
Of course in certain cases top-posted articles wouldn't hurt much, but
if newbies are not told about it, they won't do it only "occasionally,
when it makes sense", like you do, but they would do it *always*.
>concept and so must utilize a rulebook in order to organize their
>thoughts in an efficient manner ("remember...keep your writing between
>the lines!").
Gawd! You enlighted me!! I had never realized that top-posters are
free thought champions are people charachterized by a higher
intelligence and a strong sense for free thought so that they deserve
not to "keep their writing between the lines"... what an idiot I've
been!! It's so patently evident!
>> Because netiquette requires not to top-post.
>
>Oh...I see..."requires", eh?
Yes, so what? Do you happen to know any dictator who imposed it?!? I
doubt so...
It was made by the community for the community. *out of common sense*!
(as you *seem* to agree)
>> of time it's just saving a tiny percent on the writer's part and
>> making potential readers waste a huge percent of their own
>> time/resources.
>
>You're kidding right? You've got to elaborate on this one.
Not at all! I can easily imagine it to be a real PITA for a
(knowledgeable) poster who's trying to read and answer as many posts
as possible. I can imagine having to go down the post to find what
he's actually referring to, and possibly doing some additional
editing, easily add say a good 10% to the time taken to follow up to
such a post. Now, if *everybody* were doing so this would mean 10%
overall time, and if time constraints are relevant, then this would
mean about 9% less answers. Now if a post of mine falled in this 9%
because someone didn't take care of spending just a bunch of seconds
more to edit his post, then I wouldn't be happy. But that's a matter
of respect, and AFAICT you're not much familiar with it...
>> It's a matter of asking a question and deserving an answer, but
>> avoiding to take care of helping others to help us.
>>
>> PS: don't make yourself a dumbass by abusing a word like "fascist".
>
>"Dumbass"? Pehehehehee~
>
>Well, dear, if you actually know the definition of "fascism" then maybe
>you can tell me how I've "abused" the definition?
Non, mon cher,
I don't know a definition of fascism. And I doubt that a comprehensive
one can be given, except possibly for a hystorical one, which would be
useless in practice for it would fail to deal with the fact that
fascism *does* exist, now.
However fascism is many things: it is contained in nuce in the
bourgeois society and its "ethics". But it is also a matter of
ignorance and arrogance. Well, you seem to me arrogant enough...
Also, one of fascists' mottos used to be "me ne frego!" (that is "I
don't care!", but more vulgarly).
Top-posting and arguing that "I have the right to do it, you must
answer in any case, I don't care if you don't like it" *is* an "I
don't care"!
Well, I may have plainly killfiled you, but as I do not want to behave
like a fascist, I *do* care. And I couldn't help answering. Of course,
unless I realize you're not the "kind of person" I'm beginning to
suspect you are, I'll killfile you first or later, especially since I
doubt that I could get any help out of you.
Michele
--
Liberta' va cercando, ch'e' si' cara,
Come sa chi per lei vita rifiuta.
[Dante Alighieri, Purg. I, 71-72]
I am my own country - United States Confederate of Me!
[Pennywise, "My own country"]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 15:19:49 +0200
From: Michele Dondi <bik.mido@tiscalinet.it>
Subject: Re: Top posting (was Re: Concatenating an array into one string?)
Message-Id: <ca22n01iersgluv1kgqi0vor4ctjj64iag@4ax.com>
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 21:59:16 -0700, "Austin P. So (Hae Jin)"
<who@what.where> wrote:
>> Some countries go so far as to force their hapless citizens by law
>> to drive on one paricular side of the road. Fascists! Bomb them,
>> I say.
>
>Seriously, do you honestly believe that this is proper analogy? Laws
>created to preserve the life and safety of citizens are placed on the
>same scale as the maintenance of "stylistic merit"?
No, it is *not* proper for laws, could they be created to preserve the
life and safety of citizens, are in any case imposed by an authority.
Also, they often have the tendency to become self-referential so that
their original aim, that it to be a tool to aid the life of people is
reverted to the point that the life of people ends being a tool whose
only use is to obey the law.
You'll notice that instead the practice of quoting properly is a
self-established law arisen out of common sense from a base of users
that are on the exact same level except possibly for relative
expertise merits, that do not influence their respective rights and
duties, anyway.
And it is *not* proper for while driving on the left or on the right
are much the same thing, top-posting makes for inefficient and
unpleasant communication whereas quoting properly, as opposed to it,
only takes a bare minimum of additional efforts.
Michele
--
Se, nella notte in cui concepi' il duce,
Donna Rosa, toccata da divina luce,
avesse dato al fabbro predappiano
invece della fica il deretano,
l'avrebbe presa in culo quella sera
Rosa sola e non l'Italia intera.
- Poesia antifascista
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 15:47:59 +0100
From: Henry Law <lawshouse.public@btconnect.com>
Subject: Re: Top posting (was Re: Concatenating an array into one string?)
Message-Id: <ltc2n09kcr12ovn68bm9tg4dtoaguc12q8@4ax.com>
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 09:24:52 +0200, Michele Dondi
<bik.mido@tiscalinet.it> wrote:
>On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 09:08:52 -0400, Shawn Corey
><shawn.corey@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>There are basically two kinds of people in this regard: those who
two and a half ...
>top-post because they are newcomers to USENET in general and hardly
>know that you can organize your article in a better way and when
>advised not to do so *do* follow the advice maybe for convenience (but
>then first or later realize the inherent advantages), and those who,
>whatever the (supposed) reason they may have for top-posting, insist
>that they must be free to do so and give names to those who say the
>contrary, etc.
The half is those like me who know that bottom-posting is the accepted
thing (and that unlike top-posting will never get you flamed) and
therefore do it without fail, but all the while harbouring a secret
liking for top posting! When a thread's going quickly it's so much
easier just to press "N" (in my case) and see the parts of the
conversation going past like lines in a play. But don't worry ... I
keep my secret vice to myself ;-)
Henry Law <>< Manchester, England
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:53:02 GMT
From: Ala Qumsieh <notvalid@email.com>
Subject: Re: Top posting (was Re: Concatenating an array into one string?)
Message-Id: <iBacd.6616$6q2.2628@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>
Shawn Corey wrote:
>
> Scott Bryce wrote:
>
>> And if someone is responding to different parts of your post, as I am
>> doing here, how do you keep it all in context if it is all top posted?
>>
>
> I call it memory.
That's fine if you're following only one or two threads, especially if
you started them. But for the regulars here who answer tens of posts a
day, remembering every single detail is impossible. They are giving up
their time FOR FREE to help you. The only considerate thing for you to
do is to minimize their inconvenience so everyone's happy. It's all
about respect, really.
--Ala
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2001 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
#The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
#comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
#the single line:
#
# subscribe perl-users
#or:
# unsubscribe perl-users
#
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
NOTE: due to the current flood of worm email banging on ruby, the smtp
server on ruby has been shut off until further notice.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
#To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
#where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
#For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
#perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
#sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
#answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V10 Issue 7261
***************************************
