Discussion of features in Mozilla Thunderbird
When I reply to messages, my signature gets added at the end of the quoted text. Is there a way to make it appear before the quoted text so it will be immediately after the text of my reply? Thanks
Why not put your reply after the quoted text?
Because I want people to see my reply first and then if they want to recall the question they asked then they can continue reading. Otherwise they just read my reply. Not that I want to continue the "Outlook does this and that . . . ", but this IS how I am used to doing it. I was just wondering if there was anything I was missing in the preferences or anywhere that would let me change this. If not, maybe I'll check bugzilla and file my first bug. . .
I suppose someone you reply to know what he or she said. The quote is just a reference and should therefore be at the end, not the beginning.
I vote for signature before the quote, or atleast a way to choose between before and after a quote.
The author can never, in no way, be held responsible for any harm caused, mental or physical, by reading this post.
Didn't you just contradict yourself?
You mean, like you just did?
One's signature is intended to appear as a footer to one's email. Bottom-quoting is generally considered bad form already. Check the long discussion on the issue started by Peter Lairo in the last month for further information.
Short answer: adding sigs before quotes is unlikely to be added.
Given that you can set whether your cursor is placed before or after the quoted text (top or bottom quoting) it only makes sense that the signature be placed just below the cursor. After a message has been booted around for a while, it's tough to match the signature with the message if they are separated... and the separation increases with each reply/forward.
I don't see why the resistance to this idea - it seems perfectly reasonable, in fact, completely obvious that it be done this way!
if your mail client doesn't strip signatures from messages when replying then it is defective.
bottom quoting is nasty. bottom quoting below a signature would be automatically removed in many cases, giving a message recipient no context for the message
Where is the setting for this in Thunderbird?
I'm going to bump this back to the top because this is one of a short list of make or break features for me in an e-mail client.
Personally I prefer to bottom quote, and if I'm going to do so the quoted material must apear below my signature file in order for that signature to be of any use to me. Personally I feel there are two good reasons to have bottom quoting:
Forgive me if this sounds harsher than intended. I'm not trying to start a flame war over the subject it's just important to me that's all. Also forgive the newbie in me if this is already a dead horse. I just don't feel I could migrate from OE6 to Thunderbird without the ability to 'properly' bottom quote
Christopher Di Biase
I think the solution is to give the person the choice, even thought I loathe bottom quoting.
Yet again, I refer people to Google Groups to check Peter Lairo's long thread about the issue on the Moz newsgroups.
Bottom-quoting is annoying enough without Mozilla endorsing it by allowing sigs above quoted text. That merely perpetuates the problem.
I don't really know how to reply to that... people use email, web browsers and computers in different ways. Why is it a bad thing to give the users an option? Have you not gotten involved in an email thread at the office that went on and on and on and gradually made its way around and not either wondered what the history of the thread was, or been glad to have the bottom quoted text as a chat log if you will?
I'm sorry I have to disagree with you, bottom quoted text is not only not annoying to me but more functional/useful to me. Now we can either agree to disagree and hope to developers make it a configurable option or not. The question really then becomes do you want Thunderbird/Firebird to have the broadest possible apeal or would you rather just the few the arogant the elite use it?
Bottom quoting is a make or break thing for me, seriously it is. As much as it may annoy you I wouldn't be that upset if I had to stick with Outlook or Outlook Express because of it. Perhaps I should, perhaps I shouldn't waist my time trying to help test an application for the elite
Christopher Di Biase
While my reply might have been harsh, you should note for the future that I speak for myself only and that when replying to me it is rather poor form to insult the entire user community and the product itself.
Secondly, the issue (once again) is of allowing one's signature to appear above quoted text. This is a problem because:
1. It means that stripping everything below a signature line from a quoted mail is impossible because that would destroy the preserved thread.
2. It requires the receiver to read below the footer of the mail (the signature) to retrieve thread information. Further, as the thread is bottomquoted it reads in reverse order.
3. As stripping sigs is impossible, a quoted thread will contain dozens of signatures.
The fact that I personally believe bottom-quoting (along with other practices such as quoting entire threads verbatim to add a single line of support) should be criminalised is secondary to the issue being discussed, and once again it is my personal opinion.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest