And I had better post just to get xnews into this thread :-)

Rod

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 20:43:50 UTC, "Essjay001"
wrote:

Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 19:43:48 UTC, geoff wrote:

Capitol

Two of a kind eh?

Pity you had to quote it all...I've already killfiled the Capitol
Crap...


"Killfile" is such a childish response, you guys love all this macho stuff
don't you?

Not at all, I just can't be bothered to wade through his confused
postings.
--
Bob Eager
rde at tavi.co.uk
PC Server 325*4; PS/2s 9585, 8595, 9595*2, 8580*3,
P70, PC/AT..

In article 1,
Rod Hewitt wrote:
And I had better post just to get xnews into this thread :-)

and strn.

Bet there are not many people still using that :-)

Darren

In article ,
Capitol wrote:
The current standard of newsreader is Microsoft OE.

That's a bit like saying the majority of people in the world are starving.
Just because something is common doesn't make it best or the standard to
aim for.

--
*i souport publik edekashun.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article ,
Martin Angove wrote:
and I know that some companies (generally those who have
standardised on Outlook) recommend this protocol for internal emails,
but this is *not* the standard way of doing things on (most of) usenet.

I don't object to top posting in e-mails - after all it's not unreasonable
to expect the person reading it to remember what the subject was all
about, so the copy is only there for reference if needed.
This isn't the case with news, though, unless you only read a tiny amount.

--
*OK, so what's the speed of dark? *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article ,
Essjay001 wrote:
2. those people who insist on no top posting tend not to snip resulting
in my having to scroll through piles of clutter before I get to the
point. It really F***s me off! It's a bit like the guy who, when you ask
him a question, he repeats it the question before he answers. Damn that
is so annoying.

Funny. In my experience it's top posters who simply quote the entire post
for a one line reply, because they are always inexperienced. Those with
experience eventually go with the majority way. And, of course, learn to
snip.

The real problem with top posting is that it is answering the question
before putting it. If you don't see this, why quote a post at all?

--
*Why doesn't Tarzan have a beard? *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:06:42 UTC, (dmc) wrote:

In article 1,
Rod Hewitt wrote:
And I had better post just to get xnews into this thread :-)

and strn.

Bet there are not many people still using that :-)

There's only one using ProNews, and that's me!

--
Bob Eager
rde at tavi.co.uk
PC Server 325*4; PS/2s 9585, 8595, 9595*2, 8580*3,
P70, PC/AT..

You don't have to, that is the point, what he has to say is at the top

Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 20:43:50 UTC, "Essjay001"
wrote:

Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 19:43:48 UTC, geoff wrote:

Capitol

Two of a kind eh?

Pity you had to quote it all...I've already killfiled the Capitol
Crap...

"Killfile" is such a childish response, you guys love all this macho
stuff don't you?

Not at all, I just can't be bothered to wade through his confused
postings.

--

Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
Capitol wrote:
The current standard of newsreader is Microsoft OE.

That's a bit like saying the majority of people in the world are starving.

Given the obesity in the western world starving would be a good idea for
some

Just because something is common doesn't make it best or
the standard to aim for.




Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

John Armstrong wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 21:22:09 +0000, parish parish_AT_ntlworld.com
wrote:

Capitol wrote:

The current standard of newsreader is Microsoft OE. This is a top
posting protocol.

Posting style isn't a protocol; OE merely puts the cursor at the top
when replying to a post. Ctrl-End will shift it to the bottom.

To quote a recent entry on a.h.b-o-u :

Posting at the top because that's where the cursor happened to be
is like ****ting in your pants because that's where your asshole
happened to be.



ROFLMAO :-O

That's a classic

Essjay001 wrote:

parish wrote:
Essjay001 wrote:

every office I have ever worked in MOD or government

Which immediately makes any following argument illogical.
Why?


Because anything instigated by/related to the Govt. is
illogical/irrational/dumb.

Real life example:

I have recently been umnemployed and went through the rigmorole of
claiming JSA. One of the questions I had to answer was 'how much did you
earn the the last two tax years'. Well, duh!, I don't know off the top
of my head. So I root through my my files and get the answer from my
last two P60s. Hey, wait a minute, aren't P60s issued by the Inland
Revenue? Arent' they a Govt. dept.? "Yes" to both. So why doesn't the
Job Centre (an oxymoron if ever there was one), who are also a Govt.
dept. ask the IR? "We can't do that sir. They are the Inland Revenue; we
are the Dept. of Work and Pensions". Heeellllloooooo!

Of course, if the Govt. didn't employ thousands of people to duplicate
(triplicate, quadruplicate?) each others work then unemployment would be
at an all time high.


Okay smart ass I also worked for the London Evening Standard, London Masters
Builders Assoc. to name but two others


Your point being?

Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 22:07:25 +0100, Martin Angove
wrote:

Whichever way you look at it, it's a gamble.

That's a fact.

Andrew

Do you need a handyman service? Check out our
web site at http://www.handymac.co.uk

Capitol wrote:
Hi, as about the only reasoning response, I thought you might
like to hear some reasons.

What a load of rubbish. You appear to have great difficulty
in understanding. You also appear to be a complete tosser.
Expect to be ignored by many posters for your seemingly
pig-ignorant and troll-like attitude.


__________________________________________________ ______________
Sent via the PAXemail system at paxemail.com

In message ,
(dmc) wrote:

In article 1,
Rod Hewitt wrote:
And I had better post just to get xnews into this thread :-)

and strn.

Bet there are not many people still using that :-)

Darren


strn doesn't seem to put any identifying headers on the post :-( I'm
afraid that if I were enumerating now I'd still miss it...

Hwyl!

M.

--
Martin Angove (it's Cornish for "Smith") - ARM/Digital SA110 RPC
See the Aber Valley -- http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/abervalley.html
.... Since you're going to die anyway, can we use you as a shield?

In message ,
"jerrybuilt " ] wrote:

Capitol wrote:
Hi, as about the only reasoning response, I thought you might
like to hear some reasons.

What a load of rubbish.
[...]


Oh Gordon Bennett - another different news posting program I've missed
:-)

What is the total now, about 13 or 14 newsreaders?

Hwyl!

M.

--
Martin Angove (it's Cornish for "Smith") - ARM/Digital SA110 RPC
See the Aber Valley -- http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/abervalley.html
.... Play electronic games? You have too much time on your hands.

parish wrote:
Your point being?

My point being that every office I have worked always place the latest
correspondence on the top not just the government ones

Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

--

Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
Essjay001 wrote:
That's a bit like saying the majority of people in the world are
starving.

Given the obesity in the western world starving would be a good idea
for some

That's the sort of thing I'd expect from a government employee -
ignore the problem and give an irrelevant answer.

I am not a government employee, just an unemployment statistic

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

--

Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

Essjay001 wrote:

parish wrote:
Your point being?

My point being that every office I have worked always place the latest
correspondence on the top not just the government ones


That of course is usually because the company has "standardized" on OE
simply because it is bundled with Winodws (or Outlook 'coz it's bundled
with Office) and that's what OE does by default and a company can impose
whatever rules/standards it choses.

Of course it is important to distinguish between e-mail and Usenet. The
former is usually an exchange between two people (or maybe a handful of
people) but Usenet is a public forum read and contributed to by
hundreds/thousands/millions of people and grow into long convoluted
threads with sub-threads (like this one ;-) ).

If you and I were communicating by e-mail I wouldn't complain about you
top-posting (but I'd bottom-post *my* replies) however in this (or any
other) newsgroup then bottom posting is the well established convention;
the fact that it is a 30-year old convention (and thus pre-dates
Windows) is irrelevant.

Outlook, OE, Netscape/Mozilla are primarily e-mail clients that also
handle news (because there are similarities between the two). NS/Moz
bottom-posts by default but has an option to use top posting instead,
which was implemented because people were having problems getting NS/Moz
accept *at work* because the convention there was top posting.

Whether you, or I, or anyone, likes it or not, bottom-posting is the
accepted convention on Usenet (with the possible exception of the
microsoft.public hierarchy) and people who top post will be frowned upon
(although they will, initially at least, be asked *politely* to desist).

All the above applies equally to posting in HTML on Usenet.

Regards,

Parish

Essjay001 wrote:

Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
Essjay001 wrote:
That's a bit like saying the majority of people in the world are
starving.

Given the obesity in the western world starving would be a good idea
for some

That's the sort of thing I'd expect from a government employee -
ignore the problem and give an irrelevant answer.

I am not a government employee, just an unemployment statistic

Ah! a fellow Govt. artist.

We do have something in common then, even if it's not posting style :-)

It's taken nearly 6 months but I've finally got a job and start 18 Aug.
I hope you get something sorted out soon. Having been through the mill
with the Job Centre I wouldn't wish it on anyone - not even top posters
(/me ducks and runs).

In article ,
parish parish_AT_ntlworld.com wrote:

Whether you, or I, or anyone, likes it or not, bottom-posting is the
accepted convention on Usenet (with the possible exception of the
microsoft.public hierarchy) and people who top post will be frowned upon
(although they will, initially at least, be asked *politely* to desist).

And in many groups you will get flamed/ignored if you top post. In any
culture you are of course entitled to be individualistic. It is just
that if you do, you have to be prepared for the reaction that will
engender. So you are still free to top post if you want, just don't be
surprised if you engender hostility if you do so.

Peter

--
Peter Ashby
School of Life Sciences, University of Dundee, Scotland
To assume that I speak for the University of Dundee is to be deluded.
Reverse the Spam and remove to email me.

Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:06:42 UTC, (dmc) wrote:

In article 1,
Rod Hewitt wrote:
And I had better post just to get xnews into this thread :-)

and strn.

Bet there are not many people still using that :-)

There's only one using ProNews, and that's me!

I must be unique as well.

--
James...
http://www.jameshart.co.uk/

In message ,
"James Hart" wrote:

X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1058983154 17428724 81.86.162.13 (16 [76251])
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Screwfix Magic Word Posting Thingy with SDS
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Trained Monkeys With Typewriters
X-Posting-Agent: Hamster/2.0.0.1

I must be unique as well.


:-) Oh yes, very good. I like that one. Is it freeware?

Hwyl!

M.

--
Martin Angove (it's Cornish for "Smith") - ARM/Digital SA110 RPC
See the Aber Valley -- http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/abervalley.html
.... A trampoline is for cunning stunts, a truncheon for apprehending criminals

In message , jerrybuilt
] writes
Capitol wrote:
Hi, as about the only reasoning response, I thought you might
like to hear some reasons.

What a load of rubbish. You appear to have great difficulty
in understanding. You also appear to be a complete tosser.
Expect to be ignored by many posters for your seemingly
pig-ignorant and troll-like attitude.

He seems to have gone very quiet, despite the fact that we're feeding
him more than he deserves. I do hope he's gone away
--
geoff

parish wrote:

Of course it is important to distinguish between e-mail and Usenet.

No it is important that the responder reads the replies. I was talking about
paper office files
Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

parish wrote:
I am not a government employee, just an unemployment statistic

Ah! a fellow Govt. artist.

We do have something in common then, even if it's not posting style :-
)

It's taken nearly 6 months but I've finally got a job and start 18
Aug. I hope you get something sorted out soon.

Getting a job isn't the problem keeping it seems to be my stumbling block. I
simply will not let spotty kids F**k me over with their incompetance. I
really should keep my mouth shut, but with so many ******s in the top slots
it's very difficult.

Having been through
the mill with the Job Centre I wouldn't wish it on anyone

I don't mind going through the mill if I get a result, but they know and I
know that being a single guy 50+ with a small RAF pension I don't qualify
for anything but stamp.(What have I been paying for all these years)

Good luck with your new job



Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
Essjay001 wrote:
Given the obesity in the western world starving would be a good
idea for some

That's the sort of thing I'd expect from a government employee -
ignore the problem and give an irrelevant answer.

I am not a government employee, just an unemployment statistic

Well, you were warned about top posting...;-)

Did I top post to your last post? NO!

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

--

Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.

Essjay001 wrote:

parish wrote:

Of course it is important to distinguish between e-mail and Usenet.

No it is important that the responder reads the replies. I was talking about
paper office files

Huh? Your comment, to which I was replying, said:

"My point being that every office I have worked always place the latest
correspondence on the top not just the government ones"

I see no mention of paper; and why should what is done with paper have
any relevance to this discussion? We are talking about Usenet (and, I
guess, e-mail).

In article ,
Essjay001 wrote:
every office I have ever worked in MOD or government the latest
correspondence is placed on top of the file and that has been a
convention since before the computer was invented.

As, indeed, happens with a new post here which will be at the top of the
file called the subject. But in the days of hand typed memos etc in an
office, it wasn't commonplace to repeat the previous posts on the subject,
merely to refer to them.

Now I don't know what you used before the computer was invented, but I
think I have pointed to paper if not directly

The ability to store and retrieve previous material easily that a
wordprocessor provides makes for the possibility of new rules...

--
*Why are a wise man and a wise guy opposites?

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

Now that I've finished polishing her copper pot.
OK, here's tonight's treat.
Hopefully most of this will be heresy to the usenet pedants, but as most of
them will have gone into ostrich mode, I guess I'll just have to bear the
disappointment ungracefully.

I obviously didn't bother to read all the replies, other than Martin's but
lets try and dispel a few myths which seem to have occurred.


Myth 1) a large percentage of newsreaders are bottom oriented.

1) The current newsreader used in say 98% of PC's world wide is OE.
2) OE ( and now Mozilla) are top and middle posting systems.
2) If this group does not show 98% of users using OE, then for a public
consumer information oriented group it is a failure! Think about it!


Myth 2) Bottom posting is the necessary thing.

1) Bottom posting is an historical accident of news readers which have
become obsolete.
2) The minority news readers are the only filing system which works
backwards.
3) The new standard is Microsoft, by virtue of market penetration. You may
not like it, but it's the real world. ( It's also sometimes got better spell
checking than some other products!)
4) For short queries top posting is to be preferred using the majority OE
newsreader.
5) For long questions, middle posting is used, but it is read from the top,
like any other document.
6) When did you last see a book which you read backwards. Right to left,
yes, backwards, no!


Myth 3 Rigid rules of conduct are necessary.

1) The average information content is less than 1% of the posts. ( Make that
0.1% if it's an interchange between Andy and IMM)
2) The content is the important factor not the position.
3) It's a public news group with a free will user base. Rules, and rudeness
are totally unnecessary.


Myth 4) Snipping is always necessary.

1) Memory and bandwidth are now such that snipping is totally unnecessary in
a top posting system.
2) Maybe we can get some of our readers back to work if we all try to use
more bandwidth and force telecomm companies to increase their capacity!
3) Snipping can on occasions distort the reasoning of the participants.


Myth 5) We should never consider change.

1) There is a term for the people who think in this way, Luddites, if I
recall correctly. I watched much of British industry applying this strategy.
It no longer exists!
2) The new standard is Microsoft, perhaps we should consider change.
3) Mozilla did it!

( Aside, amongst my other systems,( and no, I'm not a computer buff) I also
have a Linux system using Mandrake 9, it's about as consumer friendly as
Windows1, which was never issued. Linux will not be around for at least 3
years, and the consumer version will use a top posting newsreader!)

Myth 6) You want everybody to read your post.

1) If I wanted everybody to read my post, I'd buy newspaper advertising.
2) Reading is a free will activity.
3) Book burning is a long established tradition of pedants, I've never
noticed that it changed anything, but it keeps them happy for a while

..
Myth 7) People can be changed.

1) Forget it! I've tried to change her for 50 years!
2) Cooks leave kitchens. Good laugh this one, you people are amateurs at the
flaming cooks game! Go and play in the international big league, get some
experience and try again. (I'll apologise in advance for this next bit for
the softer readers. I quite liked the concept of the "asshole" comment, but
felt it could only earn a mark of "could do better", otherwise described as
crap!)

A couple of other points which I noticed,
1) AIUI Argos changed their website because the original used cookies and
many users didn't!
2) Microsoft don't own the internet. No, they don't, but like it or not, MS
(and not always for the better) have made it the success which it is today.
3) A large number of the contributors are computer or engineering people.
This next comment is meant to be helpful.

I suggest that you

a) Don't use your own name on a news group, particularly if you are going to
be abusive.
b) Don't( if you are a contractor or somebody selling to others) put your
website address up.
c) Don't put your CV on the net.

The reason for saying this is that businesses now regularly run a Google
check on names to see what this turns up. You may be the best thing since
BOFH, but remember that the MD of the customer is generally a cunning,
talented and ruthless *******, and he is terrified of the Chairman. Your new
contract can be lost if you have been observed to write the wrong thing. If
you put up your website address, the second thing that the software manager
does is to inspect it for content and spelling. Next they dissect the
TML --AND-- the comments. Try it on a few others!! I know, I've done it!
I've taken decisions based on the way the information conveyed hit me. If
you put up your CV, under Google, it's there for ever. If you change it,
then two CV's exist! The customer will read it/them and it may not be the
same lies that you are using on this contract bid. All successful
contractors ( and I have been one for 30years) rewrite their CV every few
months but they don't publish it!

d) If you are going to be in the contracting business, join the PCG, not
perfect but better than nothing and recognise that you need to be able to
survive for up to 3 years with only very low levels of income. I worked like
a dog early on to get the reserves to meet this requirement, they were
tough to build, but it can be done!
Be prepared to take a permie job for 6 months to retrain in an
additional line of work (e.g. programmer becomes video artist). You don't
have to tell them that you're looking for the next contract! I've known
contractors who have had a sideline in car repairs! If you're prepared to
get your hands dirty, the money is there! Of course, you have to tell the
Inland Revenue about it.

There, I hope that those who were waiting for the next piece of comment are
not too disappointed.
Regards
Capitol

Dave Plowman wrote in message ...
In article ,
Essjay001 wrote:
every office I have ever worked in MOD or government the latest
correspondence is placed on top of the file and that has been a
convention since before the computer was invented.

As, indeed, happens with a new post here which will be at the top of the
file called the subject. But in the days of hand typed memos etc in an
office, it wasn't commonplace to repeat the previous posts on the subject,
merely to refer to them.

Now I don't know what you used before the computer was invented, but I
think I have pointed to paper if not directly

The ability to store and retrieve previous material easily that a
wordprocessor provides makes for the possibility of new rules...

--
*Why are a wise man and a wise guy opposites?

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

Hello again! Nice to hear from you.
I'm going to start by taking rather huge liberties with the order of you
posting:

In message ,
"Capitol" wrote:

There, I hope that those who were waiting for the next piece of comment are
not too disappointed.

Not that I was particularly "waiting" for it, but I am interested to
read your comments. "Disappointed" may be an appropriate word, but
that's not the point. You are entitled to your opinions - for most of
them are simply that - and I to mine. We may debate the issue for
eternity and never come to a conclusion and, at the end of it, what does
it matter? Having said that, your inability to grasp certain facts does
make your preaching at the end of your post rather less impressive.

Back to the plot.


Myth 1) a large percentage of newsreaders are bottom oriented.

To be pedantic, a large number of newsreaders *are* bottom oriented.
This being the case when Outlook Express is one of maybe 13 or 14
different newsreaders observed in this group, and many more in use
worldwide. 1 out of 13 is less than 8%

But I know that isn't what you meant :-) You were talking about the
population of newsreaders as a whole:


1) The current newsreader used in say 98% of PC's world wide is OE.
Firstly I'd like to know where you get that figure. Crumbs, I've never
even heard anyone claim that 98% of the world's PCs run Microsoft OSes,
let alone OE. Even if 90% of the world's PCs (those directly facing
users and not "behind the scenes" machines) use a Microsoft OS, I find
it doubtful that as many as 90% run Outlook Express. I doubt you'd get
to 90% even with OE and Outlook combined.

I'm sorry if this hurts, but unless you can back up your suppositions
with figures then your assertions are no better than IMM's. Mine aren't
much good either, but I haven't claimed they are.

You've started from the wrong end. We're not worried about the total
number of PCs, we're worried about the number of PCs which are used to
access usenet directly and not via a web interface.

Again, this is personal experience and not enumerated fact, but of the
people with internet access I know well (maybe 10 or so) not *one* reads
the newsgroups, via a newsreader or the web. It would be an interesting
survey to do but I think you would find that if you could survey all
those who regularly used usenet over a period of (say) a month, your
sample would have a larger proportion of long-term computer users than
the internet-using public as a whole.

You have to *know* about usenet before you can use it, and no-one goes
out of their way to publicise it, certainly not the web-based content
providers who would rather you used their own services than get the
information for free. Likewise, most "green" internet users feel safe in
the environs of a web browser or email client, but not when asked to
start doing something unusual. Having said that, usenet is getting a
boost now that Google has brought deja under its banner and access is
easy via the world's most well-known search engine.

*If* my supposition is correct then I think you will find that even if
the proportion of OE users as a whole is as much as 90%, the proportion
of OE users among usenet users is much lower, because these people are
more willing to be different.

2) OE ( and now Mozilla) are top and middle posting systems.
We're arguing about top-only posting. We have already agreed that
middle-posting is often a Good Thing.

2) If this group does not show 98% of users using OE, then for a public
consumer information oriented group it is a failure! Think about it!

No, it doesn't show that this particular group is a failure, it just
supports my proposition above that Joe Public doesn't (generally) read
usenet. One day when I am *terminally* bored I may survey some of the
other groups I read to see if the spread of newsreaders is similar.



Myth 2) Bottom posting is the necessary thing.

1) Bottom posting is an historical accident of news readers which have
become obsolete.
Bottom posting may be an historical accident, though I'm sure that the
people who first decided it should be like that would disagree, but
calling newsreaders which support it "obsolete" is a bit like when IMM
called my Diesel car various names because "Diesel is dirty and noisy
and expensive to run" - he obviously hadn't realised that engine
technology has moved a *heck* of a long way in the last 15 years, and
far from being an "old, dirty technology", Diesel is (apart from the
particulate thing) one of the cleanest forms of propulsion in common
usage.

Unix clone users can help here, but I bet you could find, if you looked,
half a dozen newsreaders whose default mode of operation is *not*
top-posting, which have been launched *since* Outlook became
widely-used, and which are still being actively developed.

2) The minority news readers are the only filing system which works
backwards.
My personal filing system doesn't have a "backwards" and a "forwards",
it is subject-oriented :-) Neither does it expire purely based on age in
the same way my newsreader does.

3) The new standard is Microsoft, by virtue of market penetration. You may
not like it, but it's the real world. ( It's also sometimes got better spell
checking than some other products!)

Microsoft may have been the dominant market player for the last 15
years, but that's not to say it will stay that way. For 30 years prior
to that, IBM was the dominant market force. Where are they now? (Did I
spot someone on this thread using OS/2?)

4) For short queries top posting is to be preferred using the majority OE
newsreader.
Let's forget this "majority/minority" thing, eh?

A properly-spaced answer may work well top-posted, but it works just as
well post-posted.

5) For long questions, middle posting is used, but it is read from the top,
like any other document.
As I said, we've already agreed this. Mid posting is a variant on bottom
posting (posting the answer after the question) *not* top posting
(posting the answer before the question)

6) When did you last see a book which you read backwards. Right to left,
yes, backwards, no!

Which of these is backwards?

A:
John, do you have a hammer I can borrow?
Yes Pete.
Can I come over to fetch it in ten minutes?
Come any time you like Pete, the kettle's on.
Thanks. See you soon.

or B:

Thanks. See you soon.
Come any time you like Pete, the kettle's on.
Can I come over to fetch it in ten minutes?
Yes Pete.
John, do you have a hammer I can borrow?

?

Which of these is top posted?


Myth 3 Rigid rules of conduct are necessary.

1) The average information content is less than 1% of the posts. ( Make that
0.1% if it's an interchange between Andy and IMM)

Not sure how you worked the figure out, but the principle I agree with.

2) The content is the important factor not the position.

Absolutely. However, *access* to the content is even more important. A
thread messed-up with a mixture of top and post-posting is a *pig* from
which to extract information. I speak from experience. And there's no
guarantee that you will see every post in a thread, so you may need to
read information buried deep in the quoting.

3) It's a public news group with a free will user base. Rules, and rudeness
are totally unnecessary.

Rudeness is totally unnecessary, rules are not. Without rules this ng
*could* degenerate into a mass depositry for everything from personal
adverts to binary images of sex with power tools (ouch!). There is no
law enforcement agency, no moderator, no group of "guardians" cancelling
off-charter posts, but there *is* a certain courtesy among users that
certain ways of doing something are normal for this group and hence
should be followed.

It's a free will society (I guess you could argue that one, but accept
it for now). However, I don't have the inalienable right to crank my
stereo up to 90% and play awful 1970s Welsh pop music in my living room
as I know for a fact that it would not be as interesting to my
neighbours as I find it myself. I restrict my music to volume levels
which they cannot (usually) hear, or play it loud when I know they are
out.


Myth 4) Snipping is always necessary.

1) Memory and bandwidth are now such that snipping is totally unnecessary in
a top posting system.
If you accept the first part of the argument (personally, I don't and
I'll tell you why in a second) then you must also accept that snipping
is unnecessary in a post-posting system. After all, it takes but a quick
tap of the "End" key to skip it all, doesn't it? ;-)

But I have to come back to it; bandwidth *is* still an issue, for many
internet users. Where I am now there is no cable and no ADSL. ISDN is
possible, but I really can't spare the cash. I can't even justify
spending £30 on a new 56k modem since my 33k6 modem works perfectly
well.

I will be moving soon, 200 miles away where there is *still* no cable,
no ADSL and I'll have even less spare cash. I'm going to be stuck with
33k6 for several years to come. To return to my internet-using friends
mentioned above, they *all*, except two, use modems. Granted, they're
56k modems, but some of them have better lines than others and I've yet
to hear reports of connection speeds above 48k (mind you, some wouldn't
know how to check it :-)

Even memory can still be an issue. I recently spent a year away from
home. My only internet access was via a Psion Series 5mx - I didn't take
my main computer for space and security reasons and a laptop was a: too
much money and b: even less secure. 16M of RAM and a 30M CF card.
Hmmm...

....and my home computer is now on its third hard disc. It took me
*months* to save up for the 20G drive I installed about 18 months ago.
Prior to that I had a 1G6 drive with never more than 10M free. A couple
of weeks on holiday and downloading email and news would fill that right
up until I could expire some.

Not everyone is able to upgrade every 18 months. The average age of kit
among my internet-using acquaintances is probably somewhere around 3
years. No, honestly.

To be fair though, a page of text is hardly anything, even to a
3-year-old computer (my own was bought 9 years ago, though it has been
upgraded a little since then).

2) Maybe we can get some of our readers back to work if we all try to use
more bandwidth and force telecomm companies to increase their capacity!
Wot?

3) Snipping can on occasions distort the reasoning of the participants.

Absolutely. Completely agree. Bad snipping is worse than no snipping at
all. The very worst im my opinion is the newsreader which doesn't quote
properly - leaving out the "Joe Bloggs wrote" things and not indenting.


Myth 5) We should never consider change.

1) There is a term for the people who think in this way, Luddites, if I
recall correctly. I watched much of British industry applying this strategy.
It no longer exists!

Rising to the defence of the Luddites is one of my hobbies. The myth is
that they were "anti technology". They were not. They had absolutely no
problem with the technology per-se, but they *did* have a problem with
the way it was applied.

Jacquard loom installed at' mill. Five operators doing the work of
twenty. What happens to the 15? "I don't care" says the mill owner,
"they can rot on the streets as far as I'm concerned. This is the new
way of doing things and if you don't like it you can lump it."

*This* is why the Luddites were protesting. Does it sound familiar?

And to say that the reason British Industry has all but disappeared is
because it refused to "change with the times" is a complete
misunderstanding of the way it really happened, at least in some places.
I won't mention specific examples now, but if you would care to take a
look at what has happened in South Wales since the miners' strike, and
particularly what has happened in the last 18 months or so I think you'd
be surprised.

2) The new standard is Microsoft, perhaps we should consider change.
Next year's standard may be something else :-) Are you going to become
a missionary of post-posting if next year's standard uses that by
default?

3) Mozilla did it!

Mozilla is configurable. Mind you, so is OE. To an extent.

( Aside, amongst my other systems,( and no, I'm not a computer buff) I also
have a Linux system using Mandrake 9, it's about as consumer friendly as
Windows1, which was never issued.

Windows 2 was dire too, and I did actually use that.

Sinclair BASIC was about as user friendly as a punch-card and pin, but
that didn't stop people doing incredible (for the time) things with it.
It depends on your perspective. Someone brought up on and understanding
the very core (literally) of a 1960s computer would either have found a
Spectrum trivial ("because it is not a serious cometitor to our
mainframes") or confusing (because it operated in "immediate" rather
than "shared" or "batch" modes). A 13-year-old holding his gleaming new
Spectrum on the other hand sees possibilities limited only by
imagination and a bit of money. "Batch" mode to him is as confusing as
the workings of parliament.

"Trivial" and "confusing" are accusations regularly aimed at Linux and
similar OSes and in some cases the accusations are correct. Where now
AmigaOS and TOS? But until time has tested them, you cannot tell.

For example, are you aware that a supplier of computer equipment and
software to schools has reported Microsoft to the Office of Fair
Trading? He does not install Microsoft products but has found that
schools where there is a mixture of Microsoft and other things are being
forced by MS to buy MS licences *even for those computers with no MS
software on whatsoever*.

It wasn't so long ago that schools were supposedly "standardising" on
Microsoft products "because that is what is in the workplace". This
seems not to be the case any more.


Linux will not be around for at least 3
years, and the consumer version will use a top posting newsreader!)

Well, that's a testable prediction. Whether anyone will a: remember to
check in three years and b: care is a matter for time to reveal. I dare
say there will be half a dozen or more newsreaders competing happily
when the time comes, too.

Myth 6) You want everybody to read your post.

1) If I wanted everybody to read my post, I'd buy newspaper advertising.
2) Reading is a free will activity.
3) Book burning is a long established tradition of pedants, I've never
noticed that it changed anything, but it keeps them happy for a while


Nobody writes here *expecting* everybody to read a post. BUT, everybody
writes here realising that everybody has the right to read a post and
should not be denied that right because of personal preference. Would
you consider posting HTML only? No? Why? Isn't that OE's default
behaviour?

.
Myth 7) People can be changed.

[...]
Granted. I'm not trying to change your beliefs, just your attitude :-)

A couple of other points which I noticed,
[...]
2) Microsoft don't own the internet. No, they don't, but like it or not, MS
(and not always for the better) have made it the success which it is today.
Sorry, I don't buy that one either. The internet was a rip-roaring
success before MS even realised it existed. They may have brought
internet useage to a wider and less technically-able audience, but this
is by the simple act of insisting on the use of their own software when
previously people were free to choose.

If anyone should get credit for "making the internet a success" I reckon
it should be first the share/freeware writers for making it possible
to connect any ol' thing to the internet and forcing big companies to
take notice, secondly AOL as their "easy" software predates MS by a long
way, thirdly (in this country) Freeserve for being the first to offer a
"free" connection; even though it wasn't really free at all, people
believed that the internet had suddenly become affordable.

That's enough ranting for now. I'm all "ranted out" so you probably
won't see anything from me until I've recharged my batteries :-)

Have fun with the lifestyle :-) (Vague DA quote)

Hwyl!

M.

--
Martin Angove (it's Cornish for "Smith") - ARM/Digital SA110 RPC
See the Aber Valley -- http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/abervalley.html
.... "42? 7 and a half million years and all you can come up with is 42?!"

In article ,
Capitol wrote:
Myth 1) a large percentage of newsreaders are bottom oriented.

1) The current newsreader used in say 98% of PC's world wide is OE.
2) OE ( and now Mozilla) are top and middle posting systems.
2) If this group does not show 98% of users using OE, then for a public
consumer information oriented group it is a failure! Think about it!

OE will also send in HTML without this being disabled, and many ISPs
remove any attachments.

So your 'standard' newsreader is incapable of actually sending to a
newsgroup in the hands of an incompetent.

If you wish to be dictated to by the likes of Gates, then fair enough.

Others don't and will say so.

--
*Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article , capitol (c) writes:

c 2) OE ( and now Mozilla) are top and middle posting systems.

If you have broken software, the correct response is to replace it or
find a way to work around the bugs, not just sit back and look like a
pratt.

c 1) Bottom posting is an historical accident of news readers which have
c become obsolete.

No, it is the online reflection of the fact that English is written
top to bottom, left to right. Answers come after questions.

--
Mail me as _O_
|

In article ,
"Capitol" writes:
Now that I've finished polishing her copper pot.
OK, here's tonight's treat.
Hopefully most of this will be heresy to the usenet pedants, but as most of
them will have gone into ostrich mode, I guess I'll just have to bear the
disappointment ungracefully.

I obviously didn't bother to read all the replies, other than Martin's but
lets try and dispel a few myths which seem to have occurred.


Myth 1) a large percentage of newsreaders are bottom oriented.

Myth 1) Any newsreader is in any way responsible for what anyone posts.

Myth 2) Bottom posting is the necessary thing.

Bottom posting must be a term coined by top posters who don't understand
why top posting doesn't work very well. Bottom posting is just as silly
as top posting.

1) Bottom posting is an historical accident of news readers which have
become obsolete.

No historical newsreaders ever forced any type of posting, just like
no current ones do. That deficiency has always been the human, not the
tool.

3) The new standard is Microsoft,

Microsoft doesn't have that word in its company dictionary.

Myth 3 Rigid rules of conduct are necessary.

There are no rigid rules. People have spent time working out how
to communicate effectively. That's where the guidelines come from.

1) The average information content is less than 1% of the posts. ( Make that
0.1% if it's an interchange between Andy and IMM)

If you count mistakes as negative numbers, this post of yours is
probably nearly -100%.

2) The content is the important factor not the position.

The context is part of that. Try moving all my comments to the
top of this posting and then appending your original underneath.
That would be a really silly thing to do, wouldn't it?

3) It's a public news group with a free will user base. Rules, and rudeness
are totally unnecessary.

Order is necessary, and is the reason this newsgroup has survived
as a useful resource when many haven't (uk.legal probably being the
biggest loss in the uk newsgroups).

Myth 4) Snipping is always necessary.
1) Memory and bandwidth are now such that snipping is totally unnecessary in
a top posting system.

My time to wade through loads of irrelevant nested quoted text means
I'll likely just skip that article.

2) Maybe we can get some of our readers back to work if we all try to use
more bandwidth and force telecomm companies to increase their capacity!

Struggling ISP's have just let their news service fall to bits.

3) Snipping can on occasions distort the reasoning of the participants.

That, like no snipping, is just another form of incorrect snipping.

Myth 5) We should never consider change.

It's kind of Dawinistic.
Feel free to try a change. If it works, people will take to it.

I find top posting very useful -- it gives me a an instant impression
of the poster without me having to bother reading a word, which
depending to some extent on the newsgroup, is usually very accurate.
This is more true in computer related newsgroups, but holds in most
technical newsgroups including this one.

Myth 6) You want everybody to read your post.

I assume you want those following the thread to do so or you wouldn't
bother posting.

3) A large number of the contributors are computer or engineering people.
This next comment is meant to be helpful.

I suggest that you

a) Don't use your own name on a news group, particularly if you are going to
be abusive.
b) Don't( if you are a contractor or somebody selling to others) put your
website address up.
c) Don't put your CV on the net.

The reason for saying this is that businesses now regularly run a Google
check on names to see what this turns up. You may be the best thing since
BOFH, but remember that the MD of the customer is generally a cunning,
talented and ruthless *******, and he is terrified of the Chairman. Your new
contract can be lost if you have been observed to write the wrong thing.

It must be terrible to lead a life where you are ashamed of what you say.
The credibility of anyone who tries to hide their identity is pretty
non-existant, and consequently their contributions start from a much lower
value base.

BTW, I found out after getting my current job that that my usenet
postings were a significant factor in me getting it, so it was a good
thing my employer could identify me on Usenet.

--
Andrew Gabriel
Consultant Software Engineer

In article ,
"Capitol" wrote:

Now that I've finished polishing her copper pot.
OK, here's tonight's treat.
Hopefully most of this will be heresy to the usenet pedants, but as most of
them will have gone into ostrich mode, I guess I'll just have to bear the
disappointment ungracefully.

You ignore the stark reality that if in any society you decide to do
something which annoys most people in that society then you cannot be
surprised if their reaction is not favourable to you. If you WANT to
communicate in that society you need to conform to the norms. Of course
if you don't want to communicate you are free to **** people off and
then be subsequently ignored.

All the rest of the stuff I snipped is not relevant to this simple fact.
I don't like reading replies that are top posted, I am much less likely
to respond to or take notice of top posted replies. I am not alone in
this, if you don't like it then tough.

Peter

--
Peter Ashby
School of Life Sciences, University of Dundee, Scotland
To assume that I speak for the University of Dundee is to be deluded.
Reverse the Spam and remove to email me.

In article ,
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
It must be terrible to lead a life where you are ashamed of what you
say. The credibility of anyone who tries to hide their identity is
pretty non-existant, and consequently their contributions start from a
much lower value base.

BTW, I found out after getting my current job that that my usenet
postings were a significant factor in me getting it, so it was a good
thing my employer could identify me on Usenet.

Heh heh. A couple of years ago, I criticised the sound of a prog I
sometimes work on which in this case was recorded by a new 'whiz kid'. I
made this criticism on a closed news group associated with my
'professional body'

The whiz kid got to hear of this and complained to the guy in charge of
the prog, who decided to give me a bollocking as he reckoned I'd signed
some form of confidentiality clause. I told him to sue me or f**k off.

The whiz kid hasn't worked on that prog since, and the 'boss' got sacked
recently. I'm still there. For the moment at least. ;-)

--
*He who dies with the most toys is, nonetheless, dead.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

"Capitol" wrote
| Myth 4) Snipping is always necessary.
| 1) Memory and bandwidth are now such that snipping is totally unnecessary
| in a top posting system.

Perhaps in this, and other developed countries. In less-developed countries
bandwidth is still a rare and expensive commodity.

However, clear snipping and posting order are essential to readers using
assistive technology such as text-to-speech or tactile output. Reading those
forms of output is much slower than skim-reading a visual screen, so
unneccessary content should be removed. Most newsreaders are optimised for
top-posting and correct quoting.

| 2) Maybe we can get some of our readers back to work if we all try to use
| more bandwidth and force telecomm companies to increase their capacity!

Only if someone (we) are prepared to pay for it.

| 3) Snipping can on occasions distort the reasoning of the participants.

It shouldn't, if done correctly. It helps following an argument, because
clear snipping and interleaving comments means there is no doubt about to
which part of a post a poster is responding.

Owain

In article , Andrew Gabriel (ag) writes:

ag Microsoft doesn't have [standard] in its company dictionary.

Of course they do. It's defined as `something you make up for a joke
on a slow Friday afternoon after a liquid lunch then have to pretend
makes sense for the next decade' .

--
Mail me as _O_
|

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 09:15:14 +0100, Martin Angove
wrote:

That's enough ranting for now. I'm all "ranted out" so you probably
won't see anything from me until I've recharged my batteries :-)

Is that _another_ reason not to get cordless stuff? ;O)

Take Care,
Gnube
{too thick for linux}

Capitol wrote:
1) The current newsreader used in say 98% of PC's world wide is OE.

Your figures are from what source? I'd be very surprised if it was
anything like 98% in *this* group judging by the UA strings I've seen.

2) OE ( and now Mozilla) are top and middle posting systems.

Read one of my replies to EssJay; Mozilla is *bottom* posting by default
but with an option to top post, mainly for use with e-mail where company
policy dictates this.

2) If this group does not show 98% of users using OE, then for a public
consumer information oriented group it is a failure! Think about it!


ROFLMAO. I don't know what you're smoking but I'd stop it, it's causing
brain damage.

[remaining pointless ramblings snipped]


I suggest you go and read RFC1855 "Netiquette Guidelines"

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html section 3.1.1, particularly the
para beginning "If you are sending a reply to a message".

Also read http://www.usenet.org.uk/ukpost.html particularly section 3.1,
first bullet point, and section 3.2

These are the rules of Usenet (the latter being specific to the uk.*
hierarchy). Now these rules aren't enforced by law so no-one's going to
lock you up for not following them but this is how the Internet works,
by users voluntarily adhering to agreed rules (mainly RFCs), and people
that don't adhere to them will get grief.

There is a mechanism to change these rules (RFDs I believe) so if you
really believe that top-posting should become the standard then you, or
maybe Microsoft, should propose a change to RFC1855.

This particular group has a rather basic charter but some, e.g.
uk.comp.os.win2000, have more comprhensive charters. The one for
u.c.o.win2000 expicitly forbids top-posting. See
http://www.usenet.org.uk/uk.comp.os....omp.os.win2000
(they refer to it as "upside down quoting").

parish wrote:

Read one of my replies to EssJay; Mozilla is *bottom* posting by
default but with an option to top post, mainly for use with e-mail
where company policy dictates this.

Would that be because the norm in the paper office is to place the latest
correspondence on the top of a file.

I suggest you go and read RFC1855 "Netiquette Guidelines"

"Guidelines" that says it all!


Steve R

---
One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same
manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one.