Top Posting.

M wrote:

How about middle-posting between all the paragraphs? ;-)


How about middle-posting between all the paragraphs? ;-)


How about middle-posting between all the paragraphs? ;-)


--
Paul S

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:24:45 +0100, Ed Weatherup wrote:

My friend, my newsreader is set so that your words, which are preceded
by the ">" character, appear in blue and making the "flow of this
conversation most easy to read.

I will agree that Outlook Express and it's lame handling of quoted
text actually **ENCOURAGES** top-posting.

Here's something to consider: It is not you. It is the cockeyed way
Outlook handles this thing called "quoted text" and there are numerous
(free" fixes.


Do yourself a favor, my arrogant know-everything rebellious friend.
Search Google using the term "outlook "quoted text."

It is only thanks to Outlook's newsgroup shortcomings, you like
top-posting and are defending it like a lemming.

Top-posting is rude and wrong and didn't really emerge as a PITA
until the Outlook kiddies discovered newsgroups on Usenet.

Funny, but it was about the same time that Outlook began e-mailing
HTML.

But you know what? The fastest and easiest way to get rid of Spam is
to put all HTML mail in your trash bucket. ;-)

--
Mike (amd)

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:31:33 +0100, megffan wrote:

Top-posting is putting all your comments on-top of what you are
replying to, as Outlook Express does with e-mail because of its widely
recognized inability to handle "quoted text." Several free fixes exist
for that.

"Bottom posting" is a figment of the imagination of certain poster's
here in this Outlook Express flooded newsgroup and no-where else.

Conversation on Usenet (or in "Newsnet as some here call it) and in
e-mail for that matter, flows much more logically and smoothly if
comments can be interspersed within the original text, with un-related
text is deleted.

It is polite and courteous to acknowledge the deletion of text with
the "<Snip>" comment.

--
Mike (amd)

"amd" <traffic@six.oclock> wrote in message
news:rqpklvg0nenp4pnoeoprg9mkavudnuh20v@4ax.com...


I work in a government agency where everyone uses Outlook for e-mail, as a
result everyone top posts every time. Are we insulted by this? No, we just
learned to read replies starting at the bottom, and go on with our jobs.

Standards are not set in stone, they can be changed as arbitrarily as they
are created. Maybe bottom posting was the standard that early users
developed, but when something as dominating as Outlook comes along starts
changes you have to go with the flow, or get left behind.

At the risk of an enormous flame from some or other --- if a top post is
'rude', I do really feel that some people should get out a bit more!
Personally, I find sheltering behind a pseudonym somewhat more 'rude' but
there you go. Each to his or her own.

Mike Want

On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 00:31:57 GMT, Gary L. wrote:


I understand and I do it too, whenever replying to a vendor. Still, I
don't have to like it and at last check was free to say so. ;-)

Huh?? "Bottom posting" never happened. It is a term coined here
mis-understanding the true function of the typewritten dialog as I
demonstrate here and now.


There's an old saying that goes something like this in terms of
English usage: "When enough of us are wrong; we become right."

Those who cheer the decline of interspersed replies advocate a
backward movement in the typewritten dialog this not-so-new concept
allows and it is clearly they themselves who are being left behind.

You should see the awkward ways some people try to wrestle Outlook
Express into quoting text usefully.

Bill Gates' Outlook has, in this authors opinion, done a shameful
injustice first to e-mail, and now to Usenet.

The thinking and the caring rise above it. Some crusade.

Others lie down and play dead pretending that HTML mail and
"top-posting" are somehow the wave of the future to be embraced.

Which are you?

--
Mike (amd)

Top posting is good, Outlook Express is good, Bill Gates is good.

Netiquette Nazi's notwithstanding. <vbg>

Dashii

"Quilljar" <quilljar@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:bjdlq3$737$1@titan.btinternet.com...

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 18:51:33 -0700, Dashi Toshii wrote:

I won't name call Dashii. Do some research. I demand nothing. I
suggest.

You advocate returning this medium to kindergarten, sir or madam, and
others here, unspoken, can see it as clearly as I can.

Why I even bother replying to your posts is a mystery to me, but in
the interest of inviting the lurkers to balance what you write against
what is historically correct, I will comment now and always.

If your comments are designed to somehow silence me, you have already
lost your perceived war.

Top-post away. There are others who will enjoy your relevation of
being a freshman Usenet poster, I'm sure. As for me, I was long ago
convinced. ;-)

--
Mike (amd)

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 19:45:56 -0700, Dashi Toshii wrote:

Grow up.
--
Mike (amd)

"jslevin" <jslevin@(remove)iolfree.ie> wrote in message news:<bjdoif$s08$1@kermit.esat.net>...

http://mailformat.dan.info/quoting/bottom-posting.html

--
Dan