Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:

> On Fri, 24 Sep 2021 17:16:55 GMT
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Just because Outlook[1] vict^H^H^H^Husers succumb to its pressure to
>> top-post doesn't make it a Good Thing.
>
> At work (the environment Outlook was designed for) top posting
> above a full quote is exactly the right thing to do. This is because there
> is no list and so the entire thread has to be in every message so that if
> someone else is added to the discussion they get the entire context. It
> just means that when one of these monsters lands in the inbox you have to
> start reading from the bottom, but at least by the time you get to the top
> you know what they're on about.
>
>> [1] Properly pronounced "Look out!"
>
> or "Out House".

That's the one I've always used. Outhouse Express is then for people
with diarrhea.

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:

> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2021 02:06:45 -0400
>> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2021 03:35:28 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2021 21:02:38 GMT
>>>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Easily resolved if outlook would simply position the cursor at the
>>>>> point of the new reply rather than at the start of the message when
>>>>> reading new messages.
>>>>
>>>> You have missed the point - in this context you want the
>>>> replies to be at the top and you want a complete copy of the entire
>>>> thread. Interleaved replies and snipping in that context is completely
>>>> wrong it destroys essential information.
>>>
>>> This is IMO okay in business environments. But not in the usenet.
>>
>> Of course. My point was that Outlook is designed for business
>> environments not for USENET.
>>
>
> Oh, it was *designed*?

I think it's actually the result of much work by a series of dung
beetles. :-)

I was forced to use it at a couple of workplaces. It was astonishing how
bad it was, given that Microsoft had been developing it (polishing a
turd?) for so many years. Of course, as of 2017 it still had major bugs
that had been reported to MS at least as far back as 2000. (Somewhere I
have the bug reports, but it's not worth looking for them at this
point.) Either MS doesn't know how to fix bugs, or more likely they just
don't care.

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:

> On 24 Sep 2021 21:05:57 GMT
> "Jeff Gaines" <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 24/09/2021 in message
>> <20210924190832.0e313ded01553756081c757e@eircom.net> Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>> wrote:
>>
>> >At work (the environment Outlook was designed for) top posting
>> >above a full quote is exactly the right thing to do.
>>
>> That's email, not Usenet posts. When you had to have some technical
>
> Correct, more to the point it is direct email not mailing list
> email.
>
>> knowledge to use a computer nobody top posted - email or Usenet - in fact
>
> Mailing list or USENET correct. My point was that Outlook is not
> designed for mailing lists or USENET it is designed for direct email in a
> corporate setting where top posting and full quotes are appropriate in
> complete contrast to USENET and mailing lists where they are not.

They're not appropriate for replying via e-mail to various ticketing
systems either. I run into this with clients a lot.

I think that, for business use, it would be better to put e-mail
messages into some sort of central database and allow people to access
previous replies in a conversation there (what a novel idea!), rather
than having e-mail messages accrete into thousand-pagers where your
fingers go numb if you try to scroll back to a reply near the beginning.

Exchange uses some sort of database for its mailstore. Too bad they
don't encourage its use instead of just vomiting the entire contents of
a conversation thread into each and every reply.

On Mon, 04 Oct 2021 08:57:49 -0400
Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

> I think that, for business use, it would be better to put e-mail
> messages into some sort of central database and allow people to access
> previous replies in a conversation there (what a novel idea!), rather
> than having e-mail messages accrete into thousand-pagers where your
> fingers go numb if you try to scroll back to a reply near the beginning.

The only catch with that is that for business purposes you need
circulation control - at least some people think so and they may be right.

OTOH in the last couple of years with everybody working from home
Slack threads have tended to replace email for a lot of things and they do
work that way - it's a pity that the database belongs to another company
but hey B2B is all the rage these days.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 04/10/2021 13:44, Bud Frede wrote:
> Either MS doesn't know how to fix bugs, or more likely they just
> don't care.
Designed to sell, but not to work

--
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

On 2021-10-04, Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> point.) Either MS doesn't know how to fix bugs, or more likely they just
> don't care.

They are paying low cost programmers, and save on engineers because
they are gready...
>
>
>

--

7-77-777
Evil Sinner!
to weak you should be meek, and you should brainfuck stronger
https://github.com/rofl0r/chaos-pp

On 04/10/2021 16:27, Branimir Maksimovic wrote:
> On 2021-10-04, Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>> point.) Either MS doesn't know how to fix bugs, or more likely they just
>> don't care.
>
> They are paying low cost programmers, and save on engineers because
> they are gready...

Every businessman knows that what sells product is marketing, not
engineering.

--
"First, find out who are the people you can not criticise. They are your
oppressors."
- George Orwell

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:

> On Mon, 04 Oct 2021 08:57:49 -0400
> Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>> I think that, for business use, it would be better to put e-mail
>> messages into some sort of central database and allow people to access
>> previous replies in a conversation there (what a novel idea!), rather
>> than having e-mail messages accrete into thousand-pagers where your
>> fingers go numb if you try to scroll back to a reply near the beginning.
>
> The only catch with that is that for business purposes you need
> circulation control - at least some people think so and they may be right.

They should be able to build that kind of thing into Exchange I would
think. It could keep track of a thread, who's permitted to get the
messages, who has read the messages, etc. It could then keep everything
all in order for however long regulatory or other policies require.

>
> OTOH in the last couple of years with everybody working from home
> Slack threads have tended to replace email for a lot of things and they do
> work that way - it's a pity that the database belongs to another company
> but hey B2B is all the rage these days.

I pushed for Hipchat instead of Slack because they let you run a local
instance and keep your data more under your own control. I was outvoted,
and now Hipchat is dead AFAIK anyway.

I mentioned ejabberd too, and was practically shouted out of the room. I
just thought that we'd have the code for it, it was all well-documented,
and we could do what we wanted with it.

Oh well.