On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:40 AM, Jim Fisher wrote:
My feeling is that control of this sort of thing should be leftIn my opinion, Mark's decision to collapse bottom posts but not top posts fits with what the majority of people expect. Gmail might be taken as a standard here: it does not collapse top posts, which is consistent with groups.io; and it collapses bottom posts if the prior post being quoted contains the signature, which is a clue that the post was not trimmed (and which makes it difficult to read) - which is what I was originally requesting but seems to be too hard to implement (or not worth it). I think this is the right decision, too.
The system has to do one thing or the other. It has to collapse top-posts, or not. It has to collapse bottom posts, or not. If it does nothing, it's doing something. The system can't be on the fence, make no decision, and "leave it to group admins." One way or the other, someone is going to be unhappy.
Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.