On 9 Mar 2005 01:50:14 GMT, Bruce Barnett wrote:
"Tim Zimmerman" writes:

Bottom posting wastes people's time by scrolling thru huge texts just
to find a few words.

Bottom posting doesn't people's waste time if people TRIM THEIR POSTS.

Right, and it allows people following up to _that_ response to put
everything in the correct flow and context.

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 05:54:54 GMT, Tim Zimmerman wrote:

And finally, it's completely unnecessary to quote people's "signatures" at
the ends of their postings since they just take up space.

That, sometimes, is the fault of the person with the sig file. Most
newsreaders (even Outhouse) will recognize "-- " on a line by itself as a
sig delimiter. If someone just uses "--", then it's something that looks
like, but is not, a legal sig delimiter.

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:25:35 GMT, Unisaw A100 wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote:
I _know_ that Forte lets you killfile by subject. Or sender.

See what I mean?

Like I said. I don't understand why people go out of their way to
read a thread they know they don't want to see, and then complain
about it.

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:57:27 -0500, Treetops wrote:
This may be a "perfect example" but it's kind of irrelevant in our
"imperfect" world.
99.999% of posters, be they top, bottom or middle (IMHO the worst
kind ) posters do not snip, and never will.

Your estimate is a bit high.

OK so lets compromise and make it 50%. Still a lot of non-snippers
forcing
a lot of scrolling.
So what's your magic solution for converting 50% of the world's posters
to the art of snipping?


So now, all of us when following a thread must scroll down to the
meat on the majority of posts (since bottom posts dominate), wading thru
maybe 3 days worth of posts which our eyes, if not our brain, have now
seen umteen times. What a waste of time and energy to say nothing of the
wear and tear on arthritic fingers.

Can those fingers hit "enter" every once in a while? Your line length
is
at 240 characters for that last one. Horizontal scrolling is even
more
annoying that top-posters.

I agree. Me bad. Hopefully I fixed it.

Why don't we just chaulk up the concept of snipping as a nice
theoretical but impractical plan and all start top posting.

That's the stupidest idea I've ever heard. I'd like to quote one of
Mortimer's comments in the context of your response, but you've got
the conversation all upside-down now.

Yeaaaa! Whats my prize?
Let me help you with quoting Mortimer; he said something about saving
the world's bandwidth, speeding up the internet, eliminating the
worldwide
shipment of spam, and mass education in snipping skills. Hope I got that
right. You might check with him but he may be hard to reach. Last time
I saw him he was on a horse chasing after some guy called Don Quixote
looking for windmills.



And no snipping so if someone wants to reread things, its all
there.

And I notice you didn't snip anything either.

Gee. Guess I'm part of the 50%.
OTOH I just wasn't sure how much or where to snip. It"s so complicated:
Should I trim or snip?
What is a reasonable trim?
Is it rude to snip somebodies signature?
Is the flow and context still intact?
Have I changed the meaning altogether?
Should I leave the untrimmed part from the previous 4 posts there?

I'm already in trouble with the top posting police. I just didn't want
to also
get in trouble with the snip, eerrr trim, police too.
So I wimped out and didn't snip.


I nominate Bob, the OP, for moderator.

On that, of course, we agree.

Oh oh. That was only a joke!

On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 15:36:58 -0500, Treetops wrote:

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:57:27 -0500, Treetops wrote:
This may be a "perfect example" but it's kind of irrelevant in our
"imperfect" world.
99.999% of posters, be they top, bottom or middle (IMHO the worst
kind ) posters do not snip, and never will.

Your estimate is a bit high.

OK so lets compromise and make it 50%. Still a lot of non-snippers
forcing
a lot of scrolling.
So what's your magic solution for converting 50% of the world's posters
to the art of snipping?

"Hey, did you know that if you'd trim out some of that stuff we've
all read over and over, and if you put your answers _after_ the
question, that everything works better?" type messages.

So now, all of us when following a thread must scroll down to the
meat on the majority of posts (since bottom posts dominate), wading thru
maybe 3 days worth of posts which our eyes, if not our brain, have now
seen umteen times. What a waste of time and energy to say nothing of the
wear and tear on arthritic fingers.

Can those fingers hit "enter" every once in a while? Your line length
is
at 240 characters for that last one. Horizontal scrolling is even
more
annoying that top-posters.

I agree. Me bad. Hopefully I fixed it.

Looks better, it's more like 90 now.

Why don't we just chaulk up the concept of snipping as a nice
theoretical but impractical plan and all start top posting.

That's the stupidest idea I've ever heard. I'd like to quote one of
Mortimer's comments in the context of your response, but you've got
the conversation all upside-down now.

Yeaaaa! Whats my prize?

A "Gore/Lieberman" sticker, I think.

Let me help you with quoting Mortimer; he said something about saving
the world's bandwidth, speeding up the internet, eliminating the
worldwide
shipment of spam, and mass education in snipping skills. Hope I got that
right.

See, but if you had quoted him effectively, it'd be right up there,
7 or 8 lines up, above your " Let me help".

You might check with him but he may be hard to reach. Last time
I saw him he was on a horse chasing after some guy called Don Quixote
looking for windmills.

Well, when there are people who say "Wow, what a mess, here, let me
make it worse", ...

And no snipping so if someone wants to reread things, its all
there.

And I notice you didn't snip anything either.

Gee. Guess I'm part of the 50%.

Apparently.

OTOH I just wasn't sure how much or where to snip. It"s so complicated:
Should I trim or snip?
What is a reasonable trim?

It depends. "Include enough context so people know who you're talking to
and what you're talking about" is a good guideline that I've seen for
a long time.

Is it rude to snip somebodies signature?

Never.

Is the flow and context still intact?

Not if you turn it upside-down.

Have I changed the meaning altogether?

If you have, they'll correct you.

Should I leave the untrimmed part from the previous 4 posts there?

Probably not. Anything more than two or three deep is rarely needed,
unless there's a debate about a fine or subtle point of something
rather deep.

I'm already in trouble with the top posting police. I just didn't want
to also
get in trouble with the snip, eerrr trim, police too.
So I wimped out and didn't snip.

I've never seen "lazily didn't bother to..." written that way, but
whatever.

I nominate Bob, the OP, for moderator.

On that, of course, we agree.

Oh oh. That was only a joke!

Yes, there's a lot of that going on in this sub-part of the discussion.
Which is left 4-deep because context makes sense that way.

Tom Watson wrote:
Hell, Keeter - that weren't even a guess.

That dude is into every single thread, no matter what it's about.
Side
posting On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:25:35 GMT, Unisaw A100

rules! wrote:
:-)

j4 Dave Hinz wrote:

I _know_ that Forte lets you killfile by subject. Or sender.


See what I mean?

UA100


You only get points for making good guesses, not betting on sure
things.


watson - who thought he would try both top and bottom posting in the
same message, just to see what it would be like - Ooooh, It makes me
feel soooo wicked.



Thomas J. Watson - WoodDorker

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1 (webpage)

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 22:49:59 GMT, Ned wrote:
On 8 Mar 2005 15:46:50 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

I trim for brevity and mostly top posting. I have a question for you
"Are we still better off today when gasoline is now over $2.00 at the
pump?"

Wow, Ned, you're completely ****ing this up. Now, because you top-post
_AND_ you didn't take care, you're making it look like I wrote the
above, rather than that which is below. That's ineffective no matter
how you look at it. And yes, having OBL rendered irrelevant is,
to me, more important than gas prices being where they are.

If usenet is about effective communication, then a conversational,
"question then answer" style is the most logical.

Way to **** up the flow there, Ned.

On 8 Mar 2005 15:46:50 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

I trim for brevity and mostly top posting. I have a question for you
"Are we still better off today when gasoline is now over $2.00 at the
pump?"

If usenet is about effective communication, then a conversational,
"question then answer" style is the most logical.

Tom Watson wrote:
You only get points for making good guesses, not betting on sure
things.

sigh...

watson - who thought he would try both top and bottom posting in the
same message, just to see what it would be like - Ooooh, It makes me
feel soooo wicked.

UA100, who usually follows conformity but loves to watch
panties twist when others don't...

Dave Hinz wrote:
Like I said. I don't understand why people go out of their way to
read a thread they know they don't want to see, and then complain
about it.

I'm guessing that if I continue to respond you'll continue
to respond and we'll still be at it here a couple/few weeks
down the line not having gotten anywhere near anything worth
two ****s and no one else will care, as if they do now?

UA100, who wonders, sure thing? You be the judge...

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:56:08 -0600, Unisaw A-100 wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:58:50 -0600, Unisaw A-100 wrote:

Should I be flattered?

UA100, who does like a panty twister here and there...

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 00:57:25 GMT, Unisaw A-100 wrote:
Should I be flattered?

That was more of a "pot...kettle...black" kind of thing.

If you go into the hospital or your doctors office they use acetone to clean
old tape adhesive off.


"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 00:57:25 GMT, Unisaw A-100
wrote:
Should I be flattered?

That was more of a "pot...kettle...black" kind of thing.

I see. So which am I?

UA100

Dave Hinz wrote:
That was more of a "pot...kettle...black" kind of thing.

(Top Posted For Effect)

I sorta like it when Homey gets into this mode.

It reminds me of those National Geographic flix, when the Moray Eel
is being challenged in his own litttle lair.

The hole looks so innocent...

The diver reaches in...

(The next scene shows homey with a distended belly, obviously not
needing to eat for at least a week...)






On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 22:24:28 GMT, Unisaw A-100
wrote:

I see. So which am I?

UA100

Dave Hinz wrote:
That was more of a "pot...kettle...black" kind of thing.

Thomas J. Watson - WoodDorker

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1 (webpage)

"Treetops" wrote

[Zim: Please read my replies after the word Zim:]

OK so lets compromise and make it 50%. Still a lot of non-snippers
forcing
a lot of scrolling.
So what's your magic solution for converting 50% of the world's posters
to the art of snipping?

[Zim: Did you realize that your text are broken probably due to the 'auto-
matic wrap text' feature during send. You can solve this problem by changing
your newsreader settings or previewing your message before sending them.
Did you also realized that deleting the hanging "" (below) and allowing a
space between your text and the quoted text is helpful to readers?]


So now, all of us when following a thread must scroll down to the
meat on the majority of posts (since bottom posts dominate), wading thru
maybe 3 days worth of posts which our eyes, if not our brain, have now
seen umteen times. What a waste of time and energy to say nothing of the
wear and tear on arthritic fingers.

[Zim: The message above was posted without utilizing the word wrap feature
on Treetops part, which could lead to horizontal scrolling. Instead the next
person making the reply did not include the "." This can lead to confusion. I
don't speak English everyday, but I do read/write English. With a poor message
layout, I will have to struggle to understand Treetops' reply to Dave. So, the
problem is also on my part....Here's a good example of a functional layout.]

Nit Picker wrote:
Trivia Wiz wrote
Palm Guy wrote:
Island Fan wrote:
Trivia Wiz wrote
Who is named in the original theme song of Gilligan's
Island?

Gilligan, Skipper, the Howells, and Ginger.

What about Mary Ann and the Professor?

They weren't mentioned until the second season.

And the Howells and Ginger were described, not named.

Those *poor* people.

"Bruce Barnett" wrote
"Tim Zimmerman" writes:

Bottom posting wastes people's time by scrolling thru huge texts just
to find a few words.

Bottom posting doesn't [waste people's] time if people TRIM THEIR POSTS.

Correct. I meant to say, "Bottom posting [without trimming] wastes people's
time by scrolling thru huge texts just to find a few words. :~)