NEW NON-IETF LIST ANNOUNCEMENT
IETF Meta-Discussions
This group is dedicated to the discussion of ancillary issues of
interest to the IETF community, especially discussions about how IETF
discussions and meetings should work.
-- IETF meeting locations / travel
-- Email composition design patterns
-- Anything related to DiffServ politics
<http://groups.google.com/group/ietf-meta>
On Sep 20, 2010, at 2:20 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
One of the problems I have seen emerge on many IETF mailing lists is
the habit of fisking.
By fisking I mean responding to a post line by line *while reading
it for the first time*.
Now sometimes a line by line response is entirely appropriate. If
someone raises six different issues, you want to respond to each one
separately. But other times I see posts of the following form:
> We should buy the red van
Are you crazy, the last three vans were yellow. Only an idiot would
buy a red van (etc)
> Because even though yellow is traditional the red one is on sale
for $1000 off.
I seem to be reading an increasing number of posts on various lists
where it is very clear to me that the poster did not bother to read
the entire message before starting their reply. In particular I have
read rather a lot of people starting off by accusing their opponent
of being ignorant of issues that their opponent actually states only
a few paragraphs further on.
Traditionally, top-posting (or bottom posting) has been discouraged
in favor of responding line by line. I think it is time to reverse
that preference.
In particular I find that arguments are often less combative and
somewhat shorter in mediums where people are forced to restate the
issue they are objecting to in their own words.
--
Website: http://hallambaker.com/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf