This is almost 20 years old technology has changed a lot since then.

Email clients hide quotes by default and also quote by default.

People don't treat email the same (who has the time to summarize/edit the quote anymore).

Gmail has made top posting the default which means most users will top quote.

Threading is a bit better.

Feel free to continue bottom posting but remember not to quote the whole damn thing and remember to keep the quote short enough that I hopefully don't have to scroll down to see what you added. I personally find top posting easier to follow with modern threading.

> Email clients hide quotes by default and also quote by default.

Which clients?

> Gmail has made top posting the default which means most users will top > quote.

Outlook already did this. At least with Outlook, the UI is broken, so people understand what you mean when you complain. Gmail being smart, people have a hard time grasping what you mean when you try to get them to quote "smart". And both approaches are wrong (IMNHO).

> Feel free to continue bottom posting but remember not to quote the > whole damn thing and remember to keep the quote short enough that I > hopefully don't have to scroll down to see what you added. I > personally find top posting easier to follow with modern threading.

Why would you have to scroll when "[e]mail clients hide quotes by default" ?

Anyway, lets not continue this into a flame war about top/bottom/proper quoting -- but I'm genuinely confused about your points above (they seem to contradict each other?).

I really need to play a bit with sup -- I hear they did a lot of things right.

For what it's worth, I think threading with quoting/conversations is still an unsolved problem (and I'm not just talking corner-cases and presence/absence of word wrap etc -- just what is the best way to present a conversation that a) makes conversation flow easily, and with readily available (correct amounts) of context while it is active, and b) reads like a reasonable transcript/conversation without too much redundancy for someone seeing the thread after the conversation has started. So far I think manually quoted replies, with bottom posting is by far the best).

> who has the time to summarize/edit the quote anymore

Most people on high-quality discussion lists? I think this goes more towards a "what is email as a medium"-type thing. Sometimes a quick reply is fine -- but if you are writing more than a paragraph, it is probably worth the time to put some effort into it (ironically, actively counteracted by things like hn's simple text-input field -- unless you invoke a proper editor, for example using the "It's all text!"-firefox extension, or ctrl-i for external editor with vimperator).

I think it's more that people don't really compose emails anymore -- they don't invoke a proper editor (whatever that may be for the user in question -- but something that at least allows a minimum of easy copy/cut/paste -- I would say vim/emacs, some might want something a little more modern). But when you're given an augmented text-field (the so-called rich web editors) -- ofcourse you won't be writing much. It's a horrible writing/editing experience.

Also be sure to check out the dev channel: http://www.sublimetext.com/3dev

More frequent releases, and quite stable.

You do need a Sublime text 2 license though.

It may be better to see if you can find someone who is blind and studied mathematics to some degree to see how to proceed.

I know most universities have an accessibility department which might make it easier to take a math class than trying to read a book with obscure concepts.

Test on windows?

A lot of thin fonts look bad in Windows especially chrome. So you could probably make a safe bet that if a font is thin on OSX then it will be much thinner (sometimes unreadable) on Windows.

If you want to use thin fonts only use them for the titles (but even here it looks like that causes problems).

The only reason this should be of any interest is that github took it down: https://github.com/FeministSoftwareFoundation/C-plus-Equalit...

Now that's a story worthy of being on HN: Github censoring for content. Granted, said content is utter drek.

Also, it was pretty funny. GitHub taking this down is... concerning. This will do nothing for the cause of women, en contraire.

Who cares if something is rude. Rudeness shouldn't be the deciding factor for taking something down.

Is it rude to name your program/repo god[1]?

Is it rude to use foul language[2]?

Is it rude to write code in something that isn't ruby?

Who decides whats rude enough to be taken down and what isn't? Why should I believe my text is safe when someone found another text rude enough to be taken down.

[1]: https://github.com/mojombo/god [2]: http://programming-motherfucker.com/

PHP isn't static but NearlyFreeSpeech has been a good host for me (cheap and easy as long as you don't mind ssh). They do have php and mysql if needed.

If actually static (just html and other static files): S3 might be a better choice.

I don't know about renting but perhaps check the return policy on a few websites (Amazon is usually pretty good) and try one of those after buying it and if you don't like it return it.

Except with tags you could probably have multiple groups for single posts rather than having multiple posts in separate groups (or subreddits).

You may not always say something novel or unique but I have enjoyed some of your posts immensely and if you aren't writing you may never write the next post that greatly affects someone.

Thanks for your writing, and sorry for your loss.