Re: [Marxism] Formatting (from a lurker)

[Aaron <aaron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 08:41:38 -0400
>From: Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [Marxism] Formatting (from a lurker)
>
>Aaron <aaron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> > My email client is Eudora 6.2.3 for Mac. It has the option of
> > automatically hard-wrapping one's text, but I wouldn't think of
> > using it as my default, since this list is the only place I have
> > any complaints about text that doesn't have ugly, semantically
> > meaningless line breaks. About 5 years ago, a comrade complained
> > to me about the problem, but I told him how to set his email program
> > to soft-wrap text in messages he was viewing, and I haven't had a
> > complaint from him or anybody else since!
> >
> > I'm curious, btw, what email client you're using, Louis, since it
> > seems to misbehave when encountering perfectly-correctly-formatted text .
> >
> > But I'll really try to remember to hard-wrap messages I send to this
> > list. Actually doing it isn't hard, since all I have to do is (1)
> > "Select All" and then (2) choose "Wrap Selection" from the Edit menu.
>
>It's not about being able to unwrap the text; any half-wit with access
>to a decent programming language can do that easily.  (Perl was my
>taste, when I whipped up a script to wrap and unwrap.)  Some mail
>clients do it, some don't.  Your mileage may vary.
>
>No, it's about politeness.  There are reasons why a standard is adhered
>to.

You're invoking a "standard" that's entirely non-standard.

>It is because, in writing, we wish for others to read.  It is an
>obligation of the author that he make the effort necessary for his work
>to be easily readable.  That an author does not wish to or is not able
>to make such effort is an instant black mark against him, and in some
>instances, sufficient cause to be cast forthwith into the Outer Darkness.

I don't think I need lessons on politeness as much as Louis needs
lessons on the meaning of the word "patronizing". I put as much
effort into writing AND formatting my posts as almost anybody. If you
want to lecture somebody on this matter, how about lecturing the
person who posted this:

At 10:03 +0200 2008/07/19, ****** wrote:
>THE ZIMBABWE PEOPLES' CHARTER
>Adopted at the Peoples' Convention, Harare, on the 9th of February 2008
>
>We, the People of Zimbabwe,
>After deliberations amongst ourselves and with the full knowledge of the
>work done
>by civic society organizations and social movements;
>With an understanding that our struggle for emancipation has been
>drawn-out and is
>in need of a people-driven solution;
>Hereby declare for all to know that: -
>
>1. Political Environment
>In the knowledge that our political environment since colonialism and
>after our
>national independence in 1980 has remained characterised by:
>a) A lack of respect for the rule of law;
>b) Political violence, most notably that which occurred in the early to
>late 1980s
>in the provinces of Midlands and Matabeleland, and that which occurred
>in the
>years from 1997 to present day, where lives were lost as a result of
>government actions undertaken with impunity;
>c) A lack of fundamental rights and freedoms, including freedom of
>expression
>and information, association and assembly, all characterised by the
>militarization of arms of the state and government.
>The People shall have a political environment in which: -
>· All people in Zimbabwe, including children, are guaranteed without
>discrimination the rights to freedom of expression and information,
>association
>and assembly, and all other fundamental rights and freedoms as provided
>under international law to which the state has bound itself voluntarily.
>· All people in Zimbabwe live in a society characterised by tolerance of
>divergent views, cultures or religions, honesty, integrity and common
>concern
>for the welfare of all.
>· All people in Zimbabwe are guaranteed safety and security, and a lawful
>environment free from human rights violations and impunity.
>· All national institutions including the judiciary, law enforcement
>agencies,
>state security agencies, electoral, media and human rights commissions, are
>independent and impartial and serve all the people of Zimbabwe without fear
>or favour.
>· There exists a free and vibrant media, which places emphasis on
>freedom of
>expression and information and a government, which guarantees independent
>public media as well as a vibrant and independent private media.
>· All people in Zimbabwe live in a society, which is the embodiment of
>transparency, with an efficient public service and a belief in a
>legitimate,
>people-centred state.
>And hereby further declare that never again shall we let lives be lost,
>maimed,
>tortured or traumatised by the dehumanising experiences of political
>intolerance,
>violence and lack of democratic government.

I'm going to refrain from wrapping the above quoted section myself,
since I don't want to possibly mask the bad effect of the original
double-wrapping.

>(Short form:  you can write it, but your audience doesn't *have* to read
>it.)
>
>There are certain forms, certain sacred commandments that must be
>adhered to.  One of these commandments is that the format of a message
>be determined by the least-capable mail client[1]; since there are
>mailclients out there without the capability of wrapping to 80 columns,
>wrapping text at 80 columns yourself is de rigueur.

I'm curious why it's better to expect people posting to this list to
remember to adjust to its nearly unique formatting requirements than
it is to expect people to use any of the free modern email clients
that are available for any system?

>72 columns is
>better.  Most mailclients can be set to this standard, and it is wise to
>do so; there are those out there who will consider non-wrapped text an
>immediate "bozo flag" and drop it without even bothering to read it.  On
>the other hand, nobody ever complained about mail that was wrapped
>neatly at 72 columns and arranged in paragraphs.

If I haven't complained before, I'm complaining NOW about people who
quote wrapped text and then wrap it themselves to a narrower width,
or even to the same width but not allowing for the lengthening of the
quoted lines by the quote arrows!

>That you have an option to autowrap is good.  If you must manually wrap
>- something that plagued me on older Macintoshes, I must admit - an easy
>way to do it is to use a fixed-size font, and to create a line in your
>signature that represents the longest line you would wrap at.  In my
>case, the line I chose is 72 columns.  (You can see it at the bottom of
>this message.)  You should be able to see this line as you type; when
>you reach its end, or near enough to it, whack the return key.  This
>makes it difficult to edit, true - editing the length of one line
>requires manually re-wrapping the whole paragraph - but if you are
>producing a thought for a large mailing list of other people that is
>valuable enough to read, why not spend the extra minute and make it look
>good too?

I don't consider forcing the readers to read my texts at a width of
my choice, not theirs, makes it look "good". In fact, when posting
quoted material to other lists, I often UNWRAP it to make it look
better.

>And if the thought isn't valuable enough to take the time to
>make it look good, then why bother posting it in the first place?  Think
>of it as a comradely favor you do, if you will, and carry it over into
>all aspects of your life.  Your readers will thank you for the time you
>take.

Did I remember to say "patronizing"?

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu