On 21 Jan 2006 12:46:53 -0800, Banty wrote:

In article , Mark Lloyd says...

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:45:49 GMT, Roy L. Fuchs
wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 10:48:53 -0500, Phil Munro
Gave us:


But, ... , see?


Also, Mr. Nit****ingPick,

No one has ever explained "nitpicking" in any way that makes any
sense. It' just one of the weapons used in verbal assault.

you should NEVER top post in Usenet.


Top-posting is a convenience for users, who don't want to have to
scroll down. If you think that's just a minor thing, you haven't read
a group with hundreds of new (bottom-posted) replies every time.

Actually, I prefer posting in the appropriate places (with at least
SOME of the reply in the first screenful). However, in a comparison of
posting at the top and all at the bottom, all it the top is much
preferable. This is based on actual experience, not mindless following
of (non-justified) rules.

If you trim the replies correctly, though, that isn't a problem.

It's best to bottom post to keep the events in order, but also trim out what's
too old to be directly relevant.

If some folks bottom post, and some top post, the quoted conversation loses
coherence. So there has to be some kind of convention.

Why I actually recommended was posting in the appropriate place (as I
did here). I was objecting to the presence of a single bottom-posted
reply below a LOT of quoted text (could use some trimming).

Like it not, the
convention

That's another problem, the use of things like "convention" as excuses
to get out of thinking.

is to bottom post and trim the quoted lines.


And you show that people behave as "herd animals" (usually imitating
others rather than doing their own thinking). "Convention" is not an
accurate guide to what's best, just a suggestion.

Banty

Banty
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin