What does top-posting have to do with changing subjects?
The subject line doesn't change either way.

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 03:50:41 GMT, "Thomas G. Marshall"
. com wrote:

Puckdropper said something like:
"Thomas G. Marshall"
. com wrote in
news:kn7Wi.6420$pT.2027@trndny07:


Top posting is convenient as you point out for email, because in
email there are two contributors, and less need for interleaved
posting.


*snipped and trimmed for content and length*

My newsreader makes reading messages that are either top, middle, or
bottom posted easy.

*snipped and trimmed for content and length*

My newsreaders delimit different reply indentation levels with differing
colors. Does *not* solve the problem of the mess that you're inviting when
you top post.

As an example I just did what you did. *Of course* you can hack out all but
one sentence and claim you have trimmed it down neatly and made something
easy to read. But then you have also misrepresented the entirety of what
was said.

This is made much worse by the fact that there are some newsreaders out
there that group messages into threads by subject line and not id's. When
you change subjects, you have to go out of your way to make sure that the
entirety of what was said is represented, because people with such
newsreaders will not easily understand what the original point was because
it is embodied in a different thread.

There are many well written explanations out there for why top posting is
bad. A quick google gave me too many to start listing them here.

For the record, years and years ago I used to top-post in usenet myself. I
felt that it was a cleaner representation of information: place the
information right at the top, like in email. I was dead wrong.