Internet DRAFT - draft-bambenek-posting-guidelines
draft-bambenek-posting-guidelines
Iternet Draft: Reply Posting Guidelines J. Bambenek
draft-bambenek-posting-guidelines-03.txt Univ. of Illinois
Expire 2004
Reply Posting Guidelines in One to Many Communications
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance
with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts
as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in
progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
<http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt>
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
<http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html>.
1. Abstract
This document describes the proper methods to use when replying to
messages in a One to Many communication environment such as
USENET, mailing lists, or bulletin boards. It is recommended that
top-posting in a summary reply be used primarily, or if desired
and appropriate that inline-posting or conversational-posting be
used in a point-by-point reply.
2. Introduction
This proposal is an attempt to provide a definitive standard for
posting guidelines in internet communications. Specifically, this
document will settle one aspect of particular contention in
internet communications. This area is the format of replies to
internet postings, and whether the text of those replies should go
to the top, bottom, or middle of the message. Specifically this
proposal states that conversational replies (those the respond to
messages on a point-by-point basis) should contain response text
in the middle of the message. Secondly, responses which are not
conversational, should post the response text at the top of the
message. This message supersedes the relevant guidelines in RFC
1855.
Bambenek 1
Reply Posting Guidelines May 2004
3. Conventions used in this document
Top-posting is the practice of replying to a message with the
reply text at the top of the message, with the original message
quoted beneath.
Bottom-posting is the practice of replying to a message with the
reply text at the bottom of the message, with the original message
quoted above.
Middle-posting or inline-posting is the practice of placing reply
text inside the quoted message following specific points in
which the response deals with. This is also called, for the
purposes of this document, Conversational-posting.
A "point-by-point reply" is a reply which responds to specific
sentences, paragraphs, or points in the original message.
A "summary" reply is a reply that responds to a message as a
whole.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described
in RFC-2119 [ ].
4. Guidelines for Point-by-Point Replies vs. Summary Replies.
In replies that specifically respond to individual sentences,
paragraphs, or points to the original message at least (3) three
times, Point-by-Point replies may be used. All other forms of
replies must be in the format of summary replies.
The purpose of the Summary reply is to give proper emphasis on the
reply. The reply is the focal point of the message, and as such,
that's what the readers are reading the message for, the reply.
Context is important, but as in written communication, it is
secondary in nature. In written communication, footnotes are
used, or appendices. While electronic communication is not as
formal, leaving a trimmed copy of the original message for
reference is appropriate and should be done where relevant. A
combination of Point-by-Point and Summary shall never be used.
In a nutshell, the purpose of a reply is the reply, not to provide
a transcript of an entire conversation. A trimmed quotes original
message is always recommended to include with a reply as a
reference as relevant. However, with the advent of a great variety
of message archiving services, referring to messages by URL greatly
reduces the need for quoting.
5. Guidelines for Point-by-Point Replies
In a point-by-point reply, response text is placed in the middle
Bambenek 2
Reply Posting Guidelines May 2004
of the message. An examples would be as follows:
> A blue ball should be the preferred ball in all schoolyard
> activities.
Well, I disagree, the red ball is the obvious choice.
> This is to make the ball visible...
As in the above example, there should be (1) one blank line
separating the response text with the quoted text. The response
text should immediately follow the specific point that is being
responded to in the quoted message. If necessary, quoted
paragraphs should be broken to accommodate this. If relevant, a
short summary of the response can be placed at the bottom of the
message and should not exceed (1) one paragraph per (10) ten
paragraphs quotes. However, it should be noted that if you are
replying to a message that is longer than (2) two or (3) three
typed pages, you may choose to not quote the message at all, or
include it only as an attachment. Point-by-Point replies are not
to be used as an attempt to justify bottom posting. If there are
not (3) three points to reply to, then a Summary Reply must be used.
Point-by-Point replies should only contain the most immediate
message for quoting. Rarely it is necessary to quote the message
before that. It is really never necessary to quote three or more
messages in the same reply.
6. Guidelines for Summary Replies
Summary replies are the preferred method to replying to electronic
communication. It gives the most flexibility to replies as well
as gives the best emphasis to the reply. In a reply, the response
is the primary focus of the message, not the original message. As such
the reply should be able to stand on its own, namely, that one could
read the entire reply and understand what the point is without having
to refer to quoted text. Thoughts and points should be fully developed
and any reference to the quote should be used in order to provide for a
clear meaning. It should be written as if it were an answer to an essay
question on a test, or a term paper, that it is self-sufficient for its
purpose.
An example of a summary reply is as follows:
I like what you have to say, though I think a red ball should be
used instead of a blue ball.
"Original Message from Somebody <somebody@somebox.com>:"
> A blue ball should be the preferred ball in all schoolyard
> activities. This is to make the ball visible...
Bambenek 3
Reply Posting Guidelines May 2004
As in the above example, the response is contained above the
"Original Message" line (though the actual text of this line
varies between mail/newsreaders. There should be (1) one blank line
between the last line of the response and the "Original Message"
line. The original message should still be trimmed to the
necessary and relevant pieces the response is responding to.
Frequently, response are only a few sentences for length messages,
therefore Summary replies provide the best method of putting the
emphasis on the reply, and not on the original message. This is
true for even lengthy replies, where generally, people reply to a
message as a whole and reference specific pieces of the original
message.
7. Attribution Considerations
When quoting messages, the original author should be cited. The
particular format of the attribution is flexible, however it should
contain the date (and time if applicable) of the original message,
the name and e-mail of the original author, and the forum the message
was posted in (only if there was a single forum, this is not necessary
for messages posted across several media or newsgroups).
As a superior method of attribution, references should be contained in
the text of the message. Namely, several sources of information can be
referenced by number at the bottom of a message, and then cited by number
in the text. The format of a list of references is also flexible, but
should contain at the very least, the author, the URL (or location to find
the information), and date. An example is below:
[1] RFC 1855, Hambridge, S. "Netiquette Guidelines",
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt
[2] RFC 850, Horton, M. R., "Standard for interchange of USENET messages",
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc850.txt
Referencing messages in this matter is preferred over direct quoting in
all forms of responses except point-by-point.
8. Quoting and Trimming Considerations
In replies that do quote original messages, the poster should take
particular care to use the following conventions to clarify what is
quoted text, and whom is being quoted.
All messages should include a line that indicates the source of the
quote. Most newsreaders do this automatically by using the content
of the "From:" line in the headers. The particular word choice is
the decision of the replier, but should be of the form of:
"In <newsgroup> John Q. Smith <smith@somebox.com> wrote:"
Bambenek 4
Reply Posting Guidelines May 2004
A replier may choose to include the date of the post, and must
include the e-mail address of the originator. The necessary
content is the name (as indicated in the "From:" line in the headers)
and, if applicable, the newsgroup the message was posted in. If a
message was posted to multiple groups, including the newsgroup is
not necessary.
Furthermore, lines of quoted text should always begin with "> " so
that it is clear what content is quoted and what is not. Quotes of
quotes should follow the convention of "> > " though quoting quoted
text should be, as a practice, discouraged unless necessary. It
generally isn't advised to use footnotes inside footnotes, as such,
it isn't advised to quote quoted text.
Quoted messages should always be trimmed to the relevant content
is being responded to. Repliers should consciously remove all but
the relevant material that they are quoting. This can be
accomplished by simply removing the text. No other conventions
need be followed. It is, however, optional to indicate where the
snipped text was removed by placing "SNIPPED" or "[SNIPPED]"
where text has been removed using whatever form of "> " depending
on the level of quoted text being used.
If, for some reason, the quoted text is modified by the replier,
those lines should be preceded with a "| " to indicate this.
While this may be relevant in some threats, by and large this
practice should be avoided as the quoted text "belongs" to the
original poster, and they should be the only one to make
modifications, unless the discussion specifically calls for
"community" editing.
9. Entreaty on Reply Content
It seems almost every topic of conversation of the internet that
has even a marginal level of participation has many replies that
don't add an substantial content to the discussion except to
interject things like "Me too." or "You suck." While flamine may
or may not be appropriate, replies that don't add any substantial
content should be avoided. The purpose of replying to a message
is to respond. If the reply is only a few words, and doesn't
have any content of note, the message should not be sent as it
only serves to tie up resources for no real benefit to the
discussion. If one is going to take the time to reply, one should
at least have the courtesy to actually respond to the message.
10. Enforcement
The standards in this document will be enforced beginning in August
2004 by cancelling all messages that do not adhere to the standard.
A simple cancelbot will be used that works in accordance to the
existing RFCs.
Bambenek 5
Reply Posting Guidelines May 2004
11. Security Considerations
This draft does not have any security considerations as it deals
strictly with message and reply formats in electronic
communications.
12. References
[RFC-1855], Hambridge, S., "Netiquette Guidelines", RFC 1855,
October 1995.
13. Author's Addresses
John Bambenek
University of Illinois
Urbana, IL. USA Email: bambenek@uiuc.edu
Bambenek 5
