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


Re-read my post. It follows the paragraph discussing the "snipped and
trimmed for content and length" broken logic.

When you change the subject line, you have *got* to make sure that you
include everything point you can from the replied-to post, otherwise you've
potentially started a new thread with a statement from someone else devoid
of the context of that statement.

I isolated it below, but of course, this doesn't flow properly because of
your top post.


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

....[rip]...

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.

....[rip]...

--
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"