AGP Aperture Size...

[Overlord]

All well and good.
But if I'm reading thru a thread that has 20 replies, I have no
slightest intention of clicking on each post and scrolling past every
other post to get to a reply. With bottom posting, each post I click
on I have to scroll past each post I've already read.
When I click on the second post I have to scroll past the first post,
which I've already read.
By the time I get to the 5th post, I have to scroll past the first
post, which has come up now 5 times, the second post which has come up
4 times, the third post which has come up 3 times, the fourth post
which has come up 2 times, to get to the fifth post which is what I'm
trying to read.
On a thread with 2 dozen posts, it gets too tedious for words.

I generally top post unless I'm either addressing a series of specific
questions; in which case I may middle post; or if the post I'm
responding to is very short; or if there is a specific reason to
bottom post (rare but occasional).

Also, my Free Agent, for whatever reason doesn't like my scrolling
buttons on my mouse much. Generally I have to click the post and move
to the scroll bar to scroll down. I'm commenting on threads; not
writting a book....

The problem with top posting is that it is convenient only if the person =
reading the thread does so post by post, as you implied.
Unfortunately, many people are forced to use inferior NNTP servers that =
either lose posts or have atrocious retention.
Some don't have the money to pay for the use of a commercial NNTP =
server, others use ISPs that block ports, etc.
In short, the assumption is (still) that whoever reads your post, may =
not have easy access (if at all) to the whole thread.

That is why we quote - to provide the context necessary to understand =
our posts.

Now the problem with top posting becomes obvious:
If everybody uses bottom posting, the post reads naturally, like a =
dialog from a book page. It is easy to follow and easy to understand =
who said what in response to whom.

On the contrary, if you top post, the flow becomes unnatural. You must =
go down to the bottom of the post, scan up to find the beginning of the =
first post, read down to the end, scan up to find the beginning of the =
second post, read down to the beginning of the first post, scan up to =
the beginning of the third post, read down to the beginning of the =
second post, etc...

That's why top posting is disrespectful. You make reading harder on the =
people who don't have the resources to get the whole thread.

Best regards,
Alex

--=20
Please replace myrealbox with alexoren to reply by email.

~~~~~~
Bait for spammers:
root@localhost
postmaster@localhost
admin@localhost
abuse@localhost
postmaster@[127.0.0.1]
(e-mail address removed)
~~~~~~
Remove "spamless" to email me.

 

[Rigger]

All well and good.

free agent is a good news reader.... but agent is better
and depending xnews is even better..
top post is bad net. Period.
like this one ,,,, specific to overlord cut the crap and to the point,
if you followed the thread then good if not.....

 

[Strontium]

I think x-posting is a lot more annoying...(to the point, and if you've not
followed the thread to this point...oh wHell).

-
Rigger stood up at show-n-tell, in
[email protected], and said:

 

[Same Guy]

Fri, 07 Nov 2003 01:23:24 GMT: written by (e-mail address removed)
(Overlord):

But if I'm reading thru a thread that has 20 replies, I have no
slightest intention of clicking on each post and scrolling past every
other post to get to a reply. With bottom posting, each post I click
on I have to scroll past each post I've already read.
When I click on the second post I have to scroll past the first post,
which I've already read.

This is why ppl need to trim the posts to contain only the relevant
info.

 

[jeffc]

All well and good.
But if I'm reading thru a thread that has 20 replies, I have no
slightest intention of clicking on each post and scrolling past every
other post to get to a reply.

That is a different problem. That is because people quote way too much
stuff.

 

[jeffc]

i dont see the bitching with top posting, its easier to read...you
read the first post, then go to the next and WHAT DO YOU KNOW? the
reply is on top so you dont have to scroll all the way through what
you JUST READ to read a reply...

Top posting vs bottom posting is not an issue when there is just one reply
to one quote. The problem occurs when there are multiple back levels of
quotes. If top posting and bottom posting are mixed, the order becomes
virtually impossible to follow:

Reply 4

Reply 2

Original

Reply 1

Reply 3

Reply 5

 

[W7TI]

top post is bad net. Period.

_________________________________________________________

Nonsense. Either one works, it's just a matter of personal preference.
Effective trimming (like the above) is far more important.

 

[jeffc]

_________________________________________________________

Nonsense. Either one works, it's just a matter of personal preference.

That's true, but the same can be said for driving on the left side of the
road or the right. Either one works. You only get problems when you do it
different from the recognized convention.

 

[Wes Newell]

This is my top posted reply.

I agree.
I don't agree.
I fthis doesn't make sense to you then look at the proper way below.

_________________________________________________________

Nonsense. Either one works, it's just a matter of personal preference.
Effective trimming (like the above) is far more important.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree.
_________________________________________________________

Nonsense. Either one works, it's just a matter of personal preference.
Effective trimming (like the above) is far more important.

Usenet guidelines say to reply below the initial post/response, and also
to seperate the replys if there's more than one subject you're reply to,
as I done here. Easy to tell what the reply refers to. Now isn't this much
clearer.

 

[Matt]

All well and good.
But if I'm reading thru a thread that has 20 replies, I have no
slightest intention of clicking on each post and scrolling past every
other post to get to a reply.

Not sure whether I believe you ... you replied to a bottom-posted
message that was the 19th reply in the thread.

Maybe you replied without reading the message.

Do you also have no intention of deleting irrelevant context when you
compose a reply?

 

[Overlord]

Not sure whether I believe you ... you replied to a bottom-posted
message that was the 19th reply in the thread.

Not sure if you're referring to the what I posted or to this thread.
What I meant was that it's incredibly tedious to read posts thru a
thread when each post necessitates scrolling thru everything that came
before it. When reading thru a thread, I have no need to see
everything that was posted that I just read. Nor do I feel I need to
scroll thru everything that came before numerous times for every
single post just to read thru the thread; I just read them; my short
term memory loss is not that bad.

If you are referring to THIS thread, you may (or may not) have noticed
this is crossposted to hell. "I" replied to what shows up on my
system as an original post in alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt. My post
was a reply to the single apparently original post that newly started
a thread. My post was the 5th in the thread, came directly off the
supposedly original post and started it's own branch of that thread.

Maybe you replied without reading the message.

Do you also have no intention of deleting irrelevant context when you

~~~~~~~~~~~~~snip!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
yup.


~~~~~~
Bait for spammers:
root@localhost
postmaster@localhost
admin@localhost
abuse@localhost
postmaster@[127.0.0.1]
(e-mail address removed)
~~~~~~
Remove "spamless" to email me.

 

[rabid]

top posting is the only way to go...

bottom posting is okay only if there is a small amount of text...
I no longer bother to scroll or hit page down to see some bottom
posters responses...

bottom line, the new thread should be visible without having to page
down

 

[ric]

top posting is the only way to go...

bottom posting is okay only if there is a small amount of text...
I no longer bother to scroll or hit page down to see some bottom
posters responses...

Bite me!

 

[Wes Newell]

top posting is the only way to go...

If you don't want to follow guideslines and are too lazy to do it
properly, then I guess it is for you.

bottom posting is okay only if there is a small amount of text...

Bottom posting doesn't mean to copy all the original post and them put your
reply in. You should edit out all except what's needed to make the post
understandable by a newcomer to the thread.

I no longer bother to scroll or hit page down to see some bottom
posters responses...

Too Bad. Then you're missing the replies of people that know enough to do
do things right and may have the answer you are seeking.

bottom line, the new thread should be visible without having to page
down

AFAIK, A new thread is one that doen't have any replies yet. A new subject
line. But you might not see this since it's at the bottom.

 

[W7TI]

Too Bad. Then you're missing the replies of people that know enough to do
do things right and may have the answer you are seeking.

_________________________________________________________

"Do things right"?

What you really mean is "do things my way".

Nobody but a few anal-retentive types care whether something is top- or
bottom-posted. Just trim it so it makes sense and it can be read either
way. It *really* doesn't matter.

 

[Wes Newell]

"Do things right"?

What you really mean is "do things my way".

No, that's not what I meant. You need to read the guidelines for posting
in usenet. That's what I said, I that's what I meant. And according to the
guidelines, top posting is not cosidered the correct method. Do a search
for "top posting usenet". Here's several of many reasons not to top post.

http://www.html-faq.com/etiquette/?toppost
http://www.dickalba.demon.co.uk/usenet/guide/faq_topp.html
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

Nobody but a few anal-retentive types care whether something is top- or
bottom-posted. Just trim it so it makes sense and it can be read either
way. It *really* doesn't matter.

That's just the point. It's simply to follow when there's just one top
post reply, but add 2 or 3, and 2 or 3 bottom post and the whole message
becomes jumbled. Since I rarely ask questions here, it doesn't bother me,
I just bypass these messages most of the time even if I have an answer for
them.

And lastly, why is this crossposted to so many different groups? After
this, all replys from me will only be to the group I'm subscribed to,
alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd

 

[jeffc]

top posting is the only way to go...

Sorry, wrong answer. If you want to drive on the left side of the road,
then go live in England, if you catch my drift.

bottom posting is okay only if there is a small amount of text...

Which there always should be.

 

[JAD]

yeah bottom posting is comparable to a head on collision.....right communicate as you will folks,,,,if people are interested
in what the thread is about, they will get to the point of it...

 

[jeffc]

yeah bottom posting is comparable to a head on collision.....right

communicate as you will folks,,,,if people are interested

in what the thread is about, they will get to the point of it...

I didn't say it was comparable to a head on collision, I said it was
comparable to driving on the wrong side of the road. By the way, it's
pretty obvious just by reading this post what's wrong with mixing top and
bottom posting. Obvious to all but morons, that is.

 

[ric]

yeah bottom posting is comparable to a head on collision.....right communicate as you will folks,,,,if people are interested
in what the thread is about, they will get to the point of it...

Even if the post is filled with "......." or ",,,,,,,," ??

Even when the poster fails to limit his lines to 72-75 characters?