That's pretty ridiculous. Inline quoting permits folks to trim the replied-to text to only the relevant portion. There's no need for each email to carry with

That's pretty ridiculous. Inline quoting permits folks to trim the replied-to text to only the relevant portion. There's no need for each email to carry with it a complete record of the conversation up to the point that it was written. If you don't agree, keep on reading. hota_mazi writes: > The fact that Gmail hides the quoted portion actually encourages people to use top posting more. > Which is a great thing. > I know, not a popular opinion here, but top posting saves a lot of time in catching up with long email chains. > If you don't agree, pick an old style mailing-list like a Linux kernel discussion, choose a discussion with 20+ emails in and read it from top to bottom. You'll quickly realize how exhausting inline quoting is. > lozf writes: >> Gmail also had a big hand in the reduction of top posting, by hiding the quoted message by default (click the little '...' icon to see it). >> This means that replies in-line, or below quoted text are instantly hidden and then you get complaints from the technically challenged who insist the email you sent was blank. >> I tried to educate and fight back for a long time, but too many important things were lost to those who insist on writing right where the cursor appears instead of taking a moment to position it thoughtfully, and alas the rest is history. >> Spivak writes: >>> Top posting only won in places where everyone uses Outlook. Mailing lists still use quoted style. >>> js2 writes: >>>> We have lost this battle, but keep fighting the good fight. We've also lost to top-posting and JavaScript. >>>> Sir_Cmpwn writes: >>>>> Maybe the answer is to return to sending plaintext emails? HTML emails are an abomanation. Rather than extend them, just ditch them.