On 8/27/2019 2:57 AM, Epicatt2 wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 03:28 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
Looking at this thread in its entirety I find myself reminded that
over-quoting is another widespread problem.
== ==
Bruce, not wanting to hijack this thread I'll have to agree with Chris that the over-quoting/piggybacking thingy is surely right up there with hijacking a thread. And a gently worded member notice which would ride somewhere between yours and Kathleen's should be the most effecive.
I think the "over-quoting/piggybacking" controversy and the under-quoting policy is one of those things of personal preference like top posting versus bottom posting.? A lot of the groups I am in and some I own or moderate seem to think that "no quoting" of a message is a great thing to do and so the reader has no clue what they are talking about or even who they are talking to!? There needs to be at least enough quoting to let the reader know what the comment is about or in reference to.? You might be surprised to read all of the messages posted to a forum that are simply the responder's comment without any indication of what it is about!?? My personal preference to to be over-quoted.? When that is paired with top posting it means I do not have to read the entire thread (but can if I want) but have the option to do so.? There does need to be a balance and I do not see that.? In fact, I see very little moderator coaxing to strike a balance.? There seems to be more of a tendency to chastise those that over-quote but no mention is made to those that under-quote or do not quote at all.? That paired with thread hijacking often makes it impossible to even know what the responder is talking about!
Thank you.
Jim Pruitt
