Re: Why googlers never quote and never will (Was: Re: Universal (g)libc)

In article <1128103226.120570.272660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
John Bode <john_bode@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
....
>> To make this more clear, to a googler, it doesn't make any sense to "quote"
>> (whatever the heck that is...), in fact, to do would be absurd, when all
>> the rest of the articles in the thread are right there in front of their
>> faces (just as clear as the trunk on that mouse, er, elephant). And no
>> amount of verbiage from us is going to convince them not to believe what
>> they see.
>
>I put the blame squarely on the Google interface. The Reply link at
>the bottom of the article, which is the one 99% of the users are going
>to click on (because, after all, they want to reply to the message)
>doesn't quote the article being replied to.
>
>Meanwhile, the *other* Reply link, the one I'm using to compose this
>message, which is also the one that properly quotes the article, is
>*hidden* behind the Show Options link (?!), which damn few people are
>going to bother looking for when they already have a perfectly good
>Reply link visible on the page.

I think it is more of a perception thing. They can't see what the heck
we're complaining about - because to them, it's all there just as plain as
day. What in tarnation do we mean when we say things like "Nobody knows
what you are responding to?" - when it is as clear as day (to them).

>The problem is the Google Groups interface (which blows goat chunks,
>frankly), not the people using it. Google's web designers need to be
>slapped repeatedly with large heavy binders of interface guidelines.

Yes, but that's like complaining that Microsoft makes crappy software.
You know it, and I know it, but we're not their target audience.

.