From: Doug Ewell (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Jan 07 2009 - 22:26:55 CST
I think what Rick was objecting to was the quoting of significant
portions of a long post, if not all of it, followed by +1.
It's important to keep the length of posts down, including quotational
material, but it's also important to keep enough of the quote in place
so people can tell what your +1 refers to. Finding that balance, and
also sensing when the list needs or does not need another "I agree"
post, is the key.
-- Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://www.ewellic.org http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phillips, Addison" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: <email@example.com>; "'Michael Everson'" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "'unicode Unicode Discussion'" <email@example.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 21:01 Subject: RE: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy >> >> This method of indicating approval/disapproval of a given statement >> is common in the IETF world, and it works. >> > > +1 > > Er... uh... "yeah, like I totally agree with what Erkki just said, so > count me as approving of his reasoning: I have nothing to add" > > IETF chairs and moderators do remind people to cut down their replies. > This is appropriate. Requiring people to write vast treatises of their > own just to say that they agree with a superior argument is pedantry. > > IMHO, > > Addison > > Addison Phillips > Globalization Architect -- Lab126 > > Internationalization is not a feature. > It is an architecture.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 07 2009 - 22:29:25 CST