WindowsLiveMail OE-QuoteFix Substitute

[Robin Bignall]

You have all the bad habits. Top posting is one of the worst.

And his way of picking out a line and adding a > does not preserve the
attributions. His post started:

Any reason you don't use WLM-quotefix?

</q>
We can guess that he was responding to JPG in this case, but as a
general method it's far from satisfactory.

 

[..winston]

"Ken Blake" wrote in message Understood, and no complaints. I don't do it your way, but each to his
own. And as I said above your insertion of the < and > helps, so I
don't killfile you the way I do with some people who use Windows Live
Mail and do nothing to differentiate their replies from what they are
quoting. I killfile them not because I hate them, but because their
messages are usually unintelligible.
That's probably where we differ.
I don't killfile anyone, read everything, forget little, and have no trouble finding the appropriate content in a reply in any news
reader used...some of that mindset (continues today as a moderator on the Annex Café) goes back to being a forum moderator in the
original MSN newsgroups where we also didn't complain about folks use of any client, post in html, top or bottom, attachments
etc....and since it was a subscription only forum (like the private Annex Café nntp groups) the community rarely needed to 'plonk'
anyone and Q/A help always took precedent over usenet netiquette.

 

[..winston]

I understood exactly what he said, who he was replying too and the entire context of the message.


--
....winston
msft mvp


"Robin Bignall" wrote in message

You have all the bad habits. Top posting is one of the worst.

And his way of picking out a line and adding a > does not preserve the
attributions. His post started:

Any reason you don't use WLM-quotefix?

</q>
We can guess that he was responding to JPG in this case, but as a
general method it's far from satisfactory.

 

[..winston]

"Dave-UK" wrote in message

You can go back to the Windows Live Mail version that does quote properly:
WLM2009 ver 14
http://g.live.com/1rewlive3/en/wlsetup-all.exe

A great idea for XP Probably not a good idea when using Vista or Win7 or Win8 since it does kick in a few WLM
phone-home-old-version-on-newer-os which has the ability (and turned on periodically via auto updating a few program bits) to:
a. autoupdate (agreed upon by use)
b. lock program use until updated
c. require one to hide Microsoft optional updates
d. prevent/cease to function (if using other components or integrated Live services)

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

I understood exactly what he said, who he was replying too and the
entire context of the message.

Yes, me too - because, despite saying he usually top-posts and doesn't
snip, he in this case did quote one line of what I said, added the ">",
and added his response _below_ it. (He left more of my original at the
end of his post, but that's not so important these days.)
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

.... her greatest triumph to date has been doggy-paddling to each area of the
shipping forecast. - Eddie Mair (on Charlotte Green), Radio Times 13-19
October 2012

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Hi, Ken (and John and others).

The REAL reason I use WLM probably is "inertia". ;^}

As others have said, I can certainly relate to that: I am using Turnpike
6.07, "Built on 2007-11-30 5:7"!
[]

by a bigger ISP, I still have the successor to my subscription. And I
still have the successor to OE.

Fair enough. You basically stuck with the client provided by Microsoft.
Lots of us (by looking at what it produces, rather than actually using
it) are of the opinion that WLM is a backward step (especially version
15 which dropped proper quoting). However ...

And OE/WM/WLM still fits ME. You've recommended Outlook to me several
times, Ken, and I've tried it. In fact, I have OL 2010 running in the

.... that's your prerogative. (Since I have Office, I have Outlook too,
but I too have felt no need to use it. I use it at work: it has features
that are useful in a work environment.)

background right now. But it doesn't do Newsgroups. And its
"philosophy" (I suppose that's the right word) for handling email
confuses me no end! It just doesn't fit ME.

There are clients that do - as another has said, Thunderbird is one.

Yes, I know I could use separate apps for news and mail, just as I did
20+ years ago. But I LIKE the way WLM handles both. So I haven't

Yes, I like a common client too. (Some here - and in the XP 'group - get
quite heated about our preference, citing the _very_ occasional times
when someone posts when they meant to email as the reason not to. I
ignore them.)

bothered to experiment with Forte Agent or Sea Monkey or all those
other apps that I see others are so happy with. I'm happy with WLM -
for now. Yes, I suspect that WLM's days are numbered and I will have
to choose something else in the not-too-distant future. When that time
comes, I'll be ready for advice and recommendations from you and
others. But I'm in no hurry. ;^}

Trying out WLM-QF might not be too much effort (if it's anything like
OE-Quotefix [did you ever try that in your OE days?], it'll be little
more effort to set up than would be required to manually put some ">"s
in a few posts/emails); going back to WLM14 (someone's provided a link)
probably even less effort.
[]
But only if you want to! Despite what you say about your posting style,
you've actually amended your posts (in this thread at least) into
something I have little difficulty in understanding.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

.... her greatest triumph to date has been doggy-paddling to each area of the
shipping forecast. - Eddie Mair (on Charlotte Green), Radio Times 13-19
October 2012

 

[R. C. White]

Hi, Winston.

Q/A help always took precedent over usenet netiquette.

AMEN!

This will probably be my last contribution(?) to this thread. It reminds me
of so many others that start when OP A asks a valid question; Reader B
responds with a valid answer; then Reader C chimes in with a complaint about
B's news client or posting style; then readers D, E, F, G... respond with a
long thread about "my newsreader is better than yours" and "my newsgroup
netiquette is more proper than yours". By this time, A has his answer and
has gone on with his business. leaving B, C and the others to debate
newsreaders in a very long thread that gets farther from the original
question. :>( This thread, at least, has stayed on the original topic.

To me, the content is far more important than the posting style. And I
seldom have trouble finding the content in any message that interests me, no
matter what client is used or how the poster organizes it.

G'nite.

RC
-- --
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(e-mail address removed)
Microsoft Windows MVP (2002-2010)
Windows Live Mail 2012 (Build 16.4.3505.0912) in Win8 Pro


"..winston" wrote in message
"Ken Blake" wrote in message
Understood, and no complaints. I don't do it your way, but each to his
own. And as I said above your insertion of the < and > helps, so I
don't killfile you the way I do with some people who use Windows Live
Mail and do nothing to differentiate their replies from what they are
quoting. I killfile them not because I hate them, but because their
messages are usually unintelligible.
That's probably where we differ.
I don't killfile anyone, read everything, forget little, and have no trouble
finding the appropriate content in a reply in any news
reader used...some of that mindset (continues today as a moderator on the
Annex Café) goes back to being a forum moderator in the
original MSN newsgroups where we also didn't complain about folks use of any
client, post in html, top or bottom, attachments
etc....and since it was a subscription only forum (like the private Annex
Café nntp groups) the community rarely needed to 'plonk'
anyone and

 

[Bob Henson]

Although I largely agree with your sentiments regarding top-posting. I
*strongly* disagree with the rude way you made your point.

I see nothing rude about it - it was a plain statement of fact.

 

[Bob Henson]

I understood exactly what he said, who he was replying too and the entire context of the message.

I have not edited your message in any way, I just hit "reply". You will
notice that a huge amount of quoted text has gone missing altogether.
That's because the signature markers and your top-posting combined have
caused my standards-compliant reader to chop off most of the message. It
was a good job in a way, because the message at that point had already
become impossibly scrambled under the influence of WLM and top posting
together.

I wonder if your message was posted tongue in cheek, and I am missing
the humour? It's difficult to imagine anyone not being able to see what
is plainly there in front of their eyes. Perhaps I'm the one that is
being silly and I am being conned into replying to a troll who is
deliberately trying to annoy us? The only thing that is definitely
impossible is that you really believe what you are saying.

 

[Bob Henson]

I understood exactly what he said, who he was replying too and the entire context of the message.

Ah, I've just answered my own question. I've just noticed your signature
claims that you are a Microsoft MVP. That is not possible, so I shall
assume you are a troll. Plonk.

 

[Buffalo]

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message

I understood exactly what he said, who he was replying too and the entire
context of the message.

"Yes, me too - because, despite saying he usually top-posts and doesn't
snip, he in this case did quote one line of what I said, added the ">",
and added his response _below_ it. (He left more of my original at the
end of his post, but that's not so important these days.)
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

.... her greatest triumph to date has been doggy-paddling to each area of the
shipping forecast. - Eddie Mair (on Charlotte Green), Radio Times 13-19
October 2012"

I cannot see my original post or any good suggestions to my original
question.
Not sure why.
Buffalo
PS: Yes, my WLM does not parse or attribute in ngs properly while replying.

 

[Ken Blake]

Ah, I've just answered my own question. I've just noticed your signature
claims that you are a Microsoft MVP. That is not possible, so I shall
assume you are a troll. Plonk.

You say "that is not possible," but you are completely wrong. It is
not only possible, but I can assure you that he *is* an MVP, as I am,
and as RC White used to be. I've met both of them more than once at
Microsoft MVP events in Seattle.

 

[Ken Blake]

"Ken Blake" wrote in message
Understood, and no complaints. I don't do it your way, but each to his
own. And as I said above your insertion of the < and > helps, so I
don't killfile you the way I do with some people who use Windows Live
Mail and do nothing to differentiate their replies from what they are
quoting. I killfile them not because I hate them, but because their
messages are usually unintelligible.

That's probably where we differ.

I guess so <g>.

I don't killfile anyone, read everything, forget little,

When I was younger, I used to forget little, but these days...

and have no trouble finding the appropriate content in a reply in any news
reader used...some of that mindset (continues today as a moderator on the Annex Café) goes back to being a forum moderator in the
original MSN newsgroups where we also didn't complain about folks use of any client, post in html, top or bottom, attachments
etc....and since it was a subscription only forum (like the private Annex Café nntp groups) the community rarely needed to 'plonk'
anyone and Q/A help always took precedent over usenet netiquette.

I don't like to "complain about folks use of any client, post in html,
top or bottom, attachments etc." and rarely do that, but I do
killfile trolls, and people whose messages are very difficult to
follow, whether because of the way they quote, the way you write in
English, or for any other reason. I read a lot of messages, here in
the newsgroups and in Microsoft forums, and don't want to waste my
time reading such things. I also hate to get myself into a situation
where I debate with myself about whether to reply to the nonsense a
troll posted, and killfiling them saves me a lot of time for that
reason too.

 

[R. C. White]

Hi, Buffalo.

"Buffalo" wrote in message

I cannot see my original post or any good suggestions to my original
question.
Not sure why.
Buffalo
PS: Yes, my WLM does not parse or attribute in ngs properly while
replying.

Perhaps your original post has scrolled off already. The default in WLM, as
it was in OE, is to "Download 300 headers at a time", but that might not be
enough in an active NG like this, where we might get that many new posts in
a couple of days. You can change the default by going to Tools | Read.
Insert any number up to 1000 - or UNcheck the box to get 'em all - but be
prepared for a long wait in a busy NG like this, with nearly 100,000 posts
available.

To get to the Tools menu, click the WLM button (the blue bar in the upper
left corner of the main screen; it says "File" in some versions of WLM but
the "Windows Live Mail" label will pop up in a ToolTip if you hover over it.
Click that, then choose Options | Mail and you should see the Tools screen
just like in OE. To skip some steps in the future, click Options again and
this time RIGHT-click Mail and choose Add to Quick Access Toolbar. This
will put an icon on your QAT for one-click access to the Tools screen in the
future. The QAT can be a big time-saver. ;<)

Or just check the box on the Ribbon to "Get next 300 headers".

And you are still using WLM version 15; a newer version is available.

RC
-- --
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(e-mail address removed)
Microsoft Windows MVP (2002-2010)
Windows Live Mail 2012 (Build 16.4.3505.0912) in Win8 Pro

 

[Bob Henson]

You say "that is not possible," but you are completely wrong. It is
not only possible, but I can assure you that he *is* an MVP, as I am,
and as RC White used to be. I've met both of them more than once at
Microsoft MVP events in Seattle.

I'm amazed. Anyway, it changes nothing - he's in the bozo file anyway.

 

[..winston]

Cool!
Less replies with non-value added information in future threads.

--
....winston
msft mvp consumer apps


"Bob Henson" wrote in message

 

[Ken Blake]

On 30/01/2013 3:54 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

I'm amazed. Anyway, it changes nothing - he's in the bozo file anyway.

Fine, your choice. And while you're at it, plonk me too.

Ken

 

[Robin Bignall]

I'm amazed. Anyway, it changes nothing - he's in the bozo file anyway.

I, too, am tempted. His posts are often incomprehensible unless one
wastes time looking back to see (if one can) who said what and which is
his new contribution.

I never understand why people use news clients that won't deal properly
with attributions, separation of quoted from new, and clipping. There
are several to choose from.

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Cool!
Less replies with non-value added information in future threads.

Lukewarm!
"Less replies" is a meaningless juxtaposition of words (unless "Less" is
someone's name).

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

Lukewarm!
"Less replies" is a meaningless juxtaposition of words (unless "Less" is
someone's name).

That usage has been being used since the first millennium.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko