Niall Litchfield wrote:
> "Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message
> news:41ab6a37$0$26294$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
>>> I don't like top-posting, but a program that chomps on messages
>>> that are top-posted needs work IMO.
>>
>> Just to be clear: it doesn't have the slightest problem
>> *displaying* all the text in a message. It's what happens when you
>> hit the reply button: it makes the assumption that you want to
>> reply to the actual content of a post, and not someone's
>> signature. For me, that is indeed an eminently sensible thing to
>> assume, though it is predicated on a further assumption that may
>> be less sensible given the real world we live in: that people will
>> sign their posts at the end, and not at the beginning.
>
> I stand twice corrected.
>
>>
>> I can't actually think of any culture on Earth that believes
>> signing off something first, and then actually including some
>> contents, is the right order of events. Except, of course,
>> top-posting on the Internet, which has nevertheless long been
>> deprecated.
>
> The culture I had in mind was email replies, especially in Outlook
> enabled environments ( something like 80% of corporate
> environments). These invariably top post (and don't cut: and don't
> edit, and don't spell...~)
>> As I say, it only removes anything when replying, not when
>> originally reading.
>
> I misunderstood.
>
You (or other Outlook Express users) might want to have a look at:
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
--
Jeroen
Received on Mon Nov 29 2004 - 16:07:48 CST
