windows mail and the dreaded top posting

  • Thread starter Thread starter =?iso-8859-2?Q?Maciej_So=B3tysiak?=
  • Start date Start date
William said:
What is your problem with top posting? I prefer top posting because I do
not want to have to wade through all the crap that I have read a dozen
times just to get to the reply. Top posting is best.
Click to expand...

Your ignorance is showing.

A: You figure it out.
Q: Why is that bad?
A: Writing your reply above the original message.
Q: What is top-posting?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html
 
DCR said:
Oh yeah, TOP posting is best. If not interested can go on to next post
with arrow key. Don't have to take my hands off the keyboard and fool
with the scroll bar. I've always considered bottom posting kind of rude.
Click to expand...

I feel just the opposite. Top posting is rude and also displays one's
arrogance and ignorance.

A: You figure it out.
Q: Why is that bad?
A: Writing your reply above the original message.
Q: What is top-posting?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?
 
Breaker said:
You have got to be kidding me. You really think this is not a USENet
newsgroup?

Just because it is hosted on the MSnews server does not make it
something totally seperate from USENet.
Click to expand...

This thread is teeming with ignorance. It was only fitting.
 
Scott said:
If done properly, a post with many follow-ups will have responses that are
trimmed to include only the pertinent information.

What happens of you arrive at a thread where the originally post(s) are
expired? The reply with no reference may very well make no sense.


It is indeed a standard. See --> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html

And if you really delve into it it does make perfect sense.

And if done right, you'll note that I did more than just bottom-post here.
I interspersed my response with your remarks.

This is the way it's "supposed" to be done. Of course if you want to be
arrogant (or a typical Outlook Distress user) you can just say "I don't
care as long as it makes me happy. It's all about MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!"
Click to expand...

Still, the point is valid.

If you came to newsgroups from the "casual e-mail" realm, top-posting is in
your blood and is most obvious way to perform conversations. You get the
reply, you want to read the reply. "Bottom line up-front" as they business
mail experts say. I agree it looks selfish in NGs. But that's how it works
in e-mail conversations so it seems natural to use same approach when you
add your first NNTP account to your e-mail client and start using it for the
first time. If you don't lookup RFCs before using anything of course.

Another thing is that with top-posting you don't need to care about
overquoting that much while retaining all conversation history in every
e-mail err.. message. :-)

Personally, I'm quite comfortable with both ways. The real mess starts when
they get mixed. Which unfortunately happens all the time. That's the real
problem, not top- or bottom-posting alone.
 
And there are probably some people who are quite happy with the ride and performance of the Edsels and who don't understand why radios have FM.

William
Scott said:
Oh yeah, TOP posting is best. If not interested can go on to next post
with arrow key. Don't have to take my hands off the keyboard and fool
with the scroll bar. I've always considered bottom posting kind of rude.
Click to expand...

I feel just the opposite. Top posting is rude and also displays one's
arrogance and ignorance.

A: You figure it out.
Q: Why is that bad?
A: Writing your reply above the original message.
Q: What is top-posting?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?
 
I just call them ignorant. People who have such devotion to where one
responds in a message don't have much of a life I would guess.

steve
 
Hi,
Prove it.
Click to expand...

You cannot prove or disprove an accepted practice, any more than one can
prove or disprove the existence of a supernatural supreme being. It was once
a commonly accepted practice to bottom post due to early conventions of
usenet, this made it the standard. With massive expansion of available
bandwidth, and an explosion of (yech) web-based feeds, and the influx of the
general world population (ie: non-geek) to the online world, the bottom
posting majority is becoming a minority. A standard, per se, is defined as
an accepted general practice, and the majority now is moving in the other
direction.

I don't say it's right or wrong, but it is what it is.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
Jack said:
Top posting is the way to go!
How many times you want to read quoted text, when browsing through
replies?
Jacek
Click to expand...
You have to see to context of the replies, this is especially useful when
you are reading
other people exchange of email. In such a case you read only the relevant
parts.
And also I want to be able to cut in in a replied block of text to which I
am replying as such:
bla bla bla
Click to expand...
yes, I agree.
foo, bar, baz
Click to expand...
No, I disagree.
Don't know
Click to expand...
So it's blax, blar, blah...
 
Back
Top