Yes, well said. Let's cater to those active folks following the threads.


"PopS" wrote in message
news:5NfQf.10505$452.5346@trndny03...
Personal opinion, and counter to what most responses to this will be, but:

If I'm answering an easy question, I top post because the OP knows what
he's already asked and he's prime. IF others have been following the
thread, they also know what's been said or, sometimes might have to dip
down to see the original question, but it's no big deal for me, shouldn't
be for them.

If it's more comples, I post inline and trim contectually.

If it's an ongoing discussion I bottom post because it's easiest to go
back thru a long post to read it chronologically.

Most of the silly where-post talk, including my own message here, is just
to waste time when it's available and to quiver a liver here and there for
those who make too much out of it.

That said,

"Guy King" wrote in message
...
The message Zz3Qf.6150$sp4.4886@trnddc01
from "Gooey TARBALLS" contains these words:

I'm new to these groups. And I think I "top post."

Thing is - I've no idea to what you're referring unless I first read the
bottom of the page - which is counter to how most people read English.

eg.

Because it goes counter to the flow of how English is read.

Why is top-posting bad?

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

sometimes I do both. g.

Pop