Ken Wright said:
LOL - I just figured your machine didn't give you the option, as obviously
no-one would ever do it by choice <g>
<minirant)
Actually, nearly everybody bottom-posted or in-line posted when I
started reading news in 1984. All the Unix newsreaders had that as their
default configuration.
People, for the most part, snipped the messages they replied to so that
only the relevant material was copied to the new message, which meant
that you could easily tell which point of many the responder was
replying to. Those that didn't snip, often didn't get read.
Top-posting, at least in the groups that I've frequented through the
years, while it existed in limited form, didn't become really popular
until the advent of OE, which top-posted by default.
Top-posting led to a doubling or tripling of both storage requirements
and download times for news, since top-posters are much less likely to
snip irrelevant portions of the post they're replying to. Messages
stayed on the servers for much less time, decreasing the value of the
groups. It also instantly led to a decrease in communication
effectiveness as a reader had to guess which of the seven questions that
the OP asked was being replied to by the post with one answer.
Yet another "standard" that MS managed in one swell foop to muck up,
bloat, and slow to a crawl. The 800-pound gorilla with the Midas touch...
As for me, after being beat up frequently here, I've consented in these
groups to be assimilated by the unwashed, the lazy, and the clueless.
Not that I feel judgmental...<g>
(but I do bottom post in all the other groups I read!)
</minirant>