I agree.
If everyone clipped the messages they are responding to, eliminating all
the stuff that irrelevant to their reply, then I don't mind scrolling
past it. But if I'm already familiar with a thread, and involved in it,
I don't need to see all the threaded posts that precede it.
When you are having a conversation with someone, do you insist that
the other parties repeat everything said so far on the subject, then
tell you their reply?
I'm all for convention and such, but not everything in life is linear.

John Busby wrote:
If I am following a thread in a newsgroup, I prefer to read top posted
responses because as soon as you open the message, the latest response is
right in front of you, and you don't have to scroll down to the bottom of
the message to read it.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 23:00:58 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Lew
Hartswick quickly quoth:


A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?


Is this something from Jeopardy? :-)
...lew...

Nah, it's a simple demonstration to (and demonization of) those
fidiots known as top-posters.

Life's too short to suffer fools and top-posters.


================================================ =========
The Titanic. The Hindenburg. + http://www.diversify.com
The Clintons. + Website & Graphic Design
================================================ =========