It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more messages to
get to a reply.
Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your opinion, and
I'm entitled to mine!
As Bill Murray would say, "that's the facts Jack"!

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 22:28:57 GMT, Bob wrote:
It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more messages to
get to a reply.
Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your opinion, and
I'm entitled to mine!
As Bill Murray would say, "that's the facts Jack"!

So you don't like people who don't trim un-needed content. I agree.
I also think that having answers after questions makes sense.

"Bob" wrote in message
news:JA4Xd.44051$r55.10321@attbi_s52...
It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more messages to
get to a reply.
Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your opinion,
and
I'm entitled to mine!

The real problem is trimming post, not top or bottom posting.

OTOH, when you take over as moderator, you can insist on top posting.

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 22:28:57 GMT, Bob wrote:
It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more messages to
get to a reply.
Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your opinion,
and
I'm entitled to mine!
As Bill Murray would say, "that's the facts Jack"!

So you don't like people who don't trim un-needed content. I agree.
I also think that having answers after questions makes sense.


Change of heart I see. Several months you chastised me because that is what
I did. In fact some content should be trimmed all together if it pertains
to the poster and not everyone in general.

"Bob" wrote in message
news:JA4Xd.44051$r55.10321@attbi_s52...
It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more messages to
get to a reply.
Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your opinion,
and
I'm entitled to mine!
As Bill Murray would say, "that's the facts Jack"!

IMHO if the message that you are replying to is long and drawn out, top
post it. If it is short, 7 or 8 lines, bottom post it. If the reply is
some what detailed or personally directed to one person, post "only the
answer". I feel there is no need to repeat everything for single answers.

As far as I'm concerned, pick something - top, bottom or if the subject line
has the question, delete all and just answer. In the long run - who really
cares?

Dave



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Personally I agree with you 100 percent... especially when that reply
at the bottom of the message is one word....

However....Top Posting is NOT the accepted practice...does not stop me
from using it most of the time however....(lol)

Bob G.


On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 22:28:57 GMT, "Bob" wrote:

It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more messages to
get to a reply.
Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your opinion, and
I'm entitled to mine!
As Bill Murray would say, "that's the facts Jack"!

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 22:28:57 GMT, Bob wrote:
It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more messages
to
get to a reply.
Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your opinion,
and
I'm entitled to mine!
As Bill Murray would say, "that's the facts Jack"!

So you don't like people who don't trim un-needed content. I agree.
I also think that having answers after questions makes sense.






















Who really cares????????

--

"Bob" wrote in message
news:JA4Xd.44051$r55.10321@attbi_s52...

Some of you think it's ridiculous to top

Top, bottom, doggy - it's all about variety.

Can you show us a doggy post? Just so we can compare and make a decision?

patrick conroy wrote:
"Bob" wrote in message
news:JA4Xd.44051$r55.10321@attbi_s52...


Some of you think it's ridiculous to top


Top, bottom, doggy - it's all about variety.



--
Will
Occasional Techno-geek

Mon, Mar 7, 2005, 10:28pm (EST+5) (Bob) claims:
It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more messages
to get to a reply.
Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your opinion,
and I'm entitled to mine!
As Bill Murray would say, "that's the facts Jack"!

NO, the real PITA is when people do not snip.



JOAT
Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong.
- David Fasold

In article , patrick conroy
wrote:

Top, bottom, doggy - it's all about variety.

Sex, doggy style: He sits up and begs; she rolls over and plays dead.

Gerry

[snip]

what?

:-)

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 19:24:31 -0500, "G.E.R.R.Y."
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Sex, doggy style: He sits up and begs; she rolls over and plays dead.

And the problem is....?

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 04:50:13 GMT, jo4hn vaguely
proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

[snip]

:-)

Oh boy. I can't wait to spend endless hours following
up/reading the response to this one. Just say (tmPL) it'll
be the usual suspects.

Wake me when it's over.

UA100

"Leon" writes:

IMHO if the message that you are replying to is long and drawn
out, top post it.


ALWAYS trim posts. That's the polite thing to do.
It takes an extra 10 seconds to do this.
100,000 readers deserve 10 seconds of effort, right?

--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.

"Bruce Barnett" wrote in message
news:d0k465$iqu$1

ALWAYS trim posts. That's the polite thing to do.
It takes an extra 10 seconds to do this.
100,000 readers deserve 10 seconds of effort, right?


Well actually I think that each post being answered to should be considered
as to how to answer. Trimming often means having to look at another post to
understand the response. Many think it is impolite to not have everything
right there in front of them.

"Teamcasa" wrote

As far as I'm concerned, pick something - top, bottom or if the subject line
has the question, delete all and just answer. In the long run - who really cares?

Bottom posting wastes people's time by scrolling thru huge texts just
to find a few words. Top posting wastes disk space on news
servers and many people are going to scroll down to the bottom,
wondering whether you have anything more to say. These problems
are multiplied when you quote an entire posting that in turn quotes an
entire posting.

--
The "--" means to anything under it will be deleted by some news
server. Here are more tips.

If you're responding to more than one point, you should intersperse
your comments among sections of quoted text, in point-counterpoint
style. Put a blank line between each section, to help the reader
distinguish them.

Effective "trimming" is a skill that improves with practice. If someone
complains, look closely at what you did and re-evaluate your quoting
strategy. If anyone wants to read your trimmed text they can refer
up the thread.

Attribute quotes properly by placing your comments after the
comment(s) that you are responding to, like this:

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.

But not like this,

Those *poor* people.

Nit Picker wrote:
And the Howells and Ginger were described, not named.

Trivia Wiz wrote:
They weren't mentioned until the second season.

Palm Guy wrote:
What about Mary Ann and the Professor?

Island Fan wrote:
Gilligan, Skipper, the Howells, and Ginger.

Trivia Wiz wrote
Who is named in the original theme song of Gilligan's
Island?

After all, most people agree that it's a Good Thing to use correct
spelling and grammar, but they also agree that spelling, grammar and
formatting all contribute to people's impressions of you, and have at
least some influence on how seriously other people will take you.

In newsgroups, your words are the only "visible" evidence that people
can judge you by. They also affect how easy it is for people to read it,
and understand the points that you're trying to make. In general, people
don't like to be slowed down by scrolling through unnecessary material,
or by having to stop and re-construct the logical sequence.

Reconstructed from a document maintained by Jon Bell
http://web.presby.edu/~nnqadmin/nnq/nquote.html#Q1

On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 15:06:31 -0800, Teamcasa wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, pick something - top, bottom or if the subject line
has the question, delete all and just answer. In the long run - who really
cares?

When you're trying to have a conversation, both context, and flow,
are important. If your goal is to make pronouncements and/or just
have the last word, making yourself easy to respond to I suppose isn't
a priority.

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

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 05:00:28 -0600, Unisaw A100 wrote:

Oh boy. I can't wait to spend endless hours following
up/reading the response to this one. Just say (tmPL) it'll
be the usual suspects.

Wake me when it's over.

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

In article JA4Xd.44051$r55.10321@attbi_s52, Bob wrote:
It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more messages to
get to a reply.
Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your opinion, and
I'm entitled to mine!

The difference between your 'opinion' and my 'opinion' is that bottom
posting (my opinion) has been formalized as 'correct' etiquette in
RFC1855, whereas top posting has not. I know we're all supposed to be
'empowered to be individuals' in today's society, but there's something to
be said for standards and cooperation (without which there'd be no
Internet at all).

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html

-Mike
--
http://www.mschaef.com

MSCHAEF.COM wrote:
In article JA4Xd.44051$r55.10321@attbi_s52, Bob
wrote:
It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more
messages to
get to a reply.

That is why the quoted text should be edited down to only that which
is relevant to the reply.

Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your
opinion, and
I'm entitled to mine!

Opinion is like flatulence. Everbody has it and everybody thinks
the other person's stinks worse.


The difference between your 'opinion' and my 'opinion' is that bottom

posting (my opinion) has been formalized as 'correct' etiquette in
RFC1855, whereas top posting has not. I know we're all supposed to be

'empowered to be individuals' in today's society, but there's
something to
be said for standards and cooperation (without which there'd be no
Internet at all).

"Without rules we'd all be swinging from trees flinging our crap
at each other." -- Red Forman

--

FF

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

And it's been the Usenet convention since Usenet began - probably long
before the OP ever saw a computer :-).

--
Homo sapiens is a goal, not a description

On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 10:09:23 -0800, Larry Blanchard wrote:
In article ,
says...
If usenet is about effective communication, then a conversational,
"question then answer" style is the most logical.

And it's been the Usenet convention since Usenet began - probably long
before the OP ever saw a computer :-).

Dammit Larry, you keep agreeing with me. This is way past scary.
Um...MaryAnn, or Ginger?

Bruce Barnett wrote:
ALWAYS trim posts. That's the polite thing to do.
It takes an extra 10 seconds to do this.
100,000 readers deserve 10 seconds of effort, right?


Your reply is a perfect example of how a posting should be formatted. The
purpose of a quotation is to allow a point of reference to previously written
material; it is not supposed to be an archive of an entire conversation. Bottom
posting allows for a more normal flow of conversation, but it's only effective
when folks take the trouble to trim the quotation down to a paragraph or two.
Nobody wants to scroll down through reams of material for a one line reply.

Top posting makes the flow awkward and usually the top poster doesn't bother
trimming any of his quotation either. A pox on his house!

Anyway, you get a gold star for doing it the way it should be done.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

wrote:
Opinion is like flatulence. Everbody has it and everybody thinks
the other person's stinks worse.



Not true. I've had a gastric bypass and ever since mine is carcenogenic to any
other poor soul caught in the blast. I recognize, acknowledge, and revel in
that knowledge. After all, anything worth doing is worth doing well.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

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.
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.
Why don't we just chaulk up the concept of snipping as a nice =
theoretical but impractical plan and all start top posting.
And no snipping so if someone wants to reread things, its all there.

I nominate Bob, the OP, for moderator.


"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote in =
message ...
Bruce Barnett wrote:
ALWAYS trim posts. That's the polite thing to do.
It takes an extra 10 seconds to do this.
100,000 readers deserve 10 seconds of effort, right?
=20
=20
Your reply is a perfect example of how a posting should be formatted. =
The=20
purpose of a quotation is to allow a point of reference to previously =
written=20
material; it is not supposed to be an archive of an entire =
conversation. Bottom=20
posting allows for a more normal flow of conversation, but it's only =
effective=20
when folks take the trouble to trim the quotation down to a paragraph =
or two.=20
Nobody wants to scroll down through reams of material for a one line =
reply.
=20
Top posting makes the flow awkward and usually the top poster doesn't =
bother=20
trimming any of his quotation either. A pox on his house!
=20
Anyway, you get a gold star for doing it the way it should be done.
=20
=20
=20
=20
--=20
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
=20
VE
=20

Treetops wrote:

Why don't we just chaulk up the concept of snipping as a nice theoretical but
impractical plan and all start top posting.
And no snipping so if someone wants to reread things, its all there.


Because there's no need to repost the same material over and over again. What a
waste of bandwidth! Think how much faster the internet would be if it didn't
have to ship spam worldwide. All your suggestion would do is codify the slowing
of the net... and make you feel less guilty since you can't afford the few
seconds necessary to delete redundant information. Or maybe you lack the
skills?



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

Well....

1) a regular reader doesn't need the entire threat repeated
each time. It's irritating to see the same thing again.

2) If you have a threaded news reader, you know the thread anyway.


It's really only useful to someone who hasn't been following the thread.
Besides, there is a second problem. See below, ander I first include the line I was responding to.

Here are the previous postings, in "top-posting order" to this comment.


"Leon" writes:

Well actually I think that each post being answered to should be
considered as to how to answer. Trimming often means having to look
at another post to understand the response. Many think it is
impolite to not have everything right there in front of them.

I wrote:
ALWAYS trim posts. That's the polite thing to do.
It takes an extra 10 seconds to do this.
100,000 readers deserve 10 seconds of effort, right?

Leon writes:

IMHO if the message that you are replying to is long and drawn
out, top post it.

Now that I repeated the thread WITH trimming, in the top-posting form
that you prefer, and I find hard to follow, here is the second problem
with top posting.

3) it makes discussing something point by point very
difficult to follow.

If I wanted to respond to each of your points one at a time, there is
no place to put it, while keeping previous threads intact.

I can do this with bottom posting, and make it readable.

Top posting forces you to scroll through the other posts in the
opposite and natural order of reading, and in fact you have to jump
both up and down to follow the discussion of anything more than a
short response.


You can always DAGS on "top posting"

Sites that are anti-top-posting usually outnumber anti-bottom-posting
sites by 10 to 1, or more.

--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.

"Treetops" writes:

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.

These posters are rude. The way I and most old timers see it, being
rude is anti-social. If we as a group allow this, then we are harming
ourselves for allowing rude behavior.

If we want the group to be more pleasant to read, then we should, as a
group, let others know their behavior is anti-social. If these people
learn and change, great. If not, there are kill files.

Or we can remain silent, and let the anti-social behavior continue,
and therefore encourage more anti-social behavior by accepting it. This
means there is a great chance of talented and knowledgable people
deciding to permanently leave, and we all lose.

--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.

"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.

--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.

"Bruce Barnett" wrote in message
...

Well....

1) a regular reader doesn't need the entire threat repeated
each time. It's irritating to see the same thing again.

2) If you have a threaded news reader, you know the thread anyway.


It's really only useful to someone who hasn't been following the thread.
Besides, there is a second problem. See below, ander I first include the
line I was responding to.

I agree, but I am a frequent poster and sometimes a target of how I should
do it. Really I don't care if some one wants to read what I have to say or
how they feel I should post. I normally try to make it EQUALLY easy for
both of us but being human that does not always happen.

"Bruce Barnett" wrote in message
news:d0lkom$edg$3


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




And then there are those that do not proof read what they type. See, none
of us are perfect and we all are capable of making mistakes. I for one am
guilty of all mistakes. LOL wondering what you really meant to say. ;~)

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:13:08 GMT, "Leon"
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Reasonable trimming should allow enough context to either let you know
what'ts going on, or lead you to look back. If somebody is not
interested enough to check out the thread or already have been
following it, then their importance to the thread and other posters is
minimal.

Well actually I think that each post being answered to should be considered
as to how to answer. Trimming often means having to look at another post to
understand the response. Many think it is impolite to not have everything
right there in front of them.

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 22:28:57 GMT, "Bob" vaguely
proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Please place

OT:Top posting is best

in front of the topic of messages like this.

It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more messages to
get to a reply.
Some of you think it's ridiculous to top post, but that's your opinion, and
I'm entitled to mine!
As Bill Murray would say, "that's the facts Jack"!

"Bob" writes

It's a PITA to have to scan through some times 2 or 3 or more
messages to get to a reply. Some of you think it's ridiculous to top
post, but that's your opinion, and I'm entitled to mine! As Bill
Murray would say, "that's the facts Jack"!

Most top posters tend to quote the entire posting.

First, we shouldn't quote the entire posting that we are responding
to because many people (especially outside the United States) have to
pay for their Internet access by the minute and/or by the amount of data
transferred.

Secondly, we shouldn't put our comments above the quoted material
because people who aren't directly involved in a discussion themselves
usually follow the logic more easily when they can read the material in
more-or-less chronological order.

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

Dave Hinz wrote:
I _know_ that Forte lets you killfile by subject. Or sender.


See what I mean?

UA100

Hell, Keeter - that weren't even a guess.

That dude is into every single thread, no matter what it's about.

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?

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 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.

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.

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.

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

And I notice you didn't snip anything either.

I nominate Bob, the OP, for moderator.

On that, of course, we agree.