Re: Top-Posting

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 04:51:30 +0000, Dave <me8@privacy.net> wrote in
message <76d7s0tmv3bqpntcji42tanndihpe5a6b2@4ax.com>:

>Don't you find people who complain about top-posting and "netiquette"
>dreadfully boring?

Yes, and if only OE lusers wouldn't presume their non-standard
bloatware is necessarily right just because it is given away free by
that paragon of virtue and supporter of standards-based software,
Microsoft, it would all be completely unnecessary.

Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales

Clive George

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> wrote in message
news:7sn8s0d6c3f6rbldr06brr9p29rev29jai@4ax.com...

> Yes, and if only OE lusers wouldn't presume their non-standard
> bloatware is necessarily right just because it is given away free by
> that paragon of virtue and supporter of standards-based software,
> Microsoft, it would all be completely unnecessary.

What about people who use OE and claim to know what they're doing?

cheers,
clive

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:11:10 -0000, "Clive George"
<clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
<32j6a8F3nnej5U1@individual.net>:

>What about people who use OE and claim to know what they're doing?

They know that what they are doing is Bad and Wrong, and they mend
their top-posting ways. Or they are lying about knowing what they are
doing ;-)

Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales

Clive George

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> wrote in message
news:6149s0h5rfm9g5li0la54ujjrbc0imqlmk@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:11:10 -0000, "Clive George"
> <clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> <32j6a8F3nnej5U1@individual.net>:
>
> >What about people who use OE and claim to know what they're doing?
>
> They know that what they are doing is Bad and Wrong, and they mend
> their top-posting ways.

But what if they never had top-posting ways in the first place?

(Although irritatingly work prefer top-posting and no trimming. Well, they
pay for it :-) )

cheers,
clive

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:29:39 -0000, "Clive George"
<clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
<32jhsiF3mhl2hU1@individual.net>:

>> >What about people who use OE and claim to know what they're doing?

>> They know that what they are doing is Bad and Wrong, and they mend
>> their top-posting ways.

>But what if they never had top-posting ways in the first place?

Then clearly they know what they are doing sufficiently to be Not A
Problem.

>(Although irritatingly work prefer top-posting and no trimming. Well, they
>pay for it :-) )

Yes, we have similar conventions. Including leaving the sig in place,
and including the 18Mb PowerPoint presentation when ccing the entire
global address book with the comment that the data is now in...

Or, worse, using cc instead of bcc, so that when the clueless lusers
click "reply all" to say thanks, you get 800 copies of the same
f***ing PowerPoint presentation with a one-line "thanks" at the top...

It is my mission to start cross-charging end users for bandwidth :-)

Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:29:39 -0000, "Clive George"
<clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
<32jhsiF3mhl2hU1@individual.net>:

>> >What about people who use OE and claim to know what they're doing?

>> They know that what they are doing is Bad and Wrong, and they mend
>> their top-posting ways.

>But what if they never had top-posting ways in the first place?

Then clearly they know what they are doing sufficiently to be Not A
Problem.

>(Although irritatingly work prefer top-posting and no trimming. Well, they
>pay for it :-) )

Yes, we have similar conventions. Including leaving the sig in place,
and including the 18Mb PowerPoint presentation when ccing the entire
global address book with the comment that the data is now in...

Or, worse, using cc instead of bcc, so that when the clueless lusers
click "reply all" to say thanks, you get 800 copies of the same
f***ing PowerPoint presentation with a one-line "thanks" at the top...

It is my mission to start cross-charging end users for bandwidth :-)

Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales

Tony Raven

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
> They know that what they are doing is Bad and Wrong, and they mend
> their top-posting ways. Or they are lying about knowing what they are
> doing ;-)
>

Interestingly I top post on work e-mails and bottom post on Usenet.
Personally though I think all this top/bottom posting stuff is a
leftover from a time when newsreaders didn't thread and bandwidth was
limited. These days with threading newsreaders, quick access to
multiple messages, high volumes of posts and thread drift its far easier
to use the newsreader threading than rely on reading all the thread
history in one post before reading the new comment. I personally think
in current times logic would point to top posting but history has a lot
of vocal adherents.

Tony

Tony Raven

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
> It is my mission to start cross-charging end users for bandwidth :-)
>

I'm sure no-one will mind if you recharge what it costs you as long as
you don't add on handling charges etc for the cost of your recharging
administration. ;-)

Tony

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:49:01 +0000, Tony Raven <junk@raven-family.com>
wrote in message <32jjduF3lp9f0U1@individual.net>:

>I personally think
>in current times logic would point to top posting but history has a lot
>of vocal adherents.

On Usenet specifically, I disagree. When you look up an old post on
Google it's handy to have the thing there with its own inbuilt
context. I think, though, that the most annoying thing about OE and
using OE's model for Usenet is that the entire previous post (and
history) is included, complete with sigs, every time, which makes even
the Google archive unwieldy. I could defend posting with no quoting
whatever, and I do use the top-post default at work (as everyone
does), but even then there are occasions at work where I lapse into
Usenet mode, with interleaved quoting, especially when people ask
multiple questions.

In a simple discussion it makes little difference either way, except
to the people who carry the news feeds (although the cost implications
of Outlook-style untrimmed quoting must be significant), but when
dealing with detailed arguments or more technical subjects I genuinely
think that top-posting reduces clarity. And because I think that, I
am happy to use interleaved quoting all the time, since it avoids the
confusion inherent in multiple concurrent "standards".

Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales

Tony Raven

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
>
> On Usenet specifically, I disagree. When you look up an old post on
> Google it's handy to have the thing there with its own inbuilt
> context. I think, though, that the most annoying thing about OE and
> using OE's model for Usenet is that the entire previous post (and
> history) is included, complete with sigs, every time, which makes even
> the Google archive unwieldy. I could defend posting with no quoting
> whatever, and I do use the top-post default at work (as everyone
> does), but even then there are occasions at work where I lapse into
> Usenet mode, with interleaved quoting, especially when people ask
> multiple questions.
>

I think you are making an arguement about trimming, not about where the
new material is posted.

Tony

JBB

"Clive George" <clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:32j6a8F3nnej5U1@individual.net...
> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> wrote in message
> news:7sn8s0d6c3f6rbldr06brr9p29rev29jai@4ax.com...
>
>> Yes, and if only OE lusers wouldn't presume their non-standard
>> bloatware is necessarily right just because it is given away free by
>> that paragon of virtue and supporter of standards-based software,
>> Microsoft, it would all be completely unnecessary.
>
> What about people who use OE and claim to know what they're doing?
>
> cheers,
> clive
>

I use OE and manage to stick to convention. I might top-post in the reply to
a personal email but I would expect the original sender to know the
content - after all they wrote it. With usenet you are effectively
btoadcasting so the convention makes sense.

Julia

Patrick Herring

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> wrote:

| On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:29:39 -0000, "Clive George"
| <clive@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
| <32jhsiF3mhl2hU1@individual.net>:
....
| >(Although irritatingly work prefer top-posting and no trimming. Well, they
| >pay for it :-) )
|
| Yes, we have similar conventions.

The first place I saw top-posting was Lotus ccMail (IIRC) work email.
It is quite the norm in in-house emails, in fact I've got complained
at before now for doing otherwise.

I don't really see any difference between what works well in news from
what works well in emails.

--
Patrick Herring, http://www.anweald.co.uk/ph.html

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 21:12:38 +0000, Tony Raven <junk@raven-family.com>
wrote in message <32jkq7F3l1sc5U1@individual.net>:

>> I do use the top-post default at work (as everyone
>> does), but even then there are occasions at work where I lapse into
>> Usenet mode, with interleaved quoting, especially when people ask
>> multiple questions.

>I think you are making an arguement about trimming, not about where the
>new material is posted.

Above the question?

> Should I post the answer

;-)

Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales

Zog The Undeniable

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

> Yes, we have similar conventions. Including leaving the sig in place,
> and including the 18Mb PowerPoint presentation when ccing the entire
> global address book with the comment that the data is now in...
>
> Or, worse, using cc instead of bcc, so that when the clueless lusers
> click "reply all" to say thanks, you get 800 copies of the same
> f***ing PowerPoint presentation with a one-line "thanks" at the top...

Our tech support people always send screenshots pasted into Word
documents as bitmaps, so a perfectly reasonable 20K .gif becomes a 2MB
monster.