On 7 Feb 2007 at 16:32, Fred Salzer wrote:

> Although I'm a lurker, I thought I'd contribute this.
> 
> "Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting"
> <http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html>
> 
> Fred

http://fmf.fwn.rug.nl/~anton/topposting.html
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_chr0.htm
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_stv0.htm
http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/nquote.html
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting.html
http://www.html-faq.com/faq.php?clue=topposting
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt
http://www.malibutelecom.fi/yucca/usenet/brox.html
http://www.newsreaders.com/
http://www.planefacts.ndirect.co.uk/group/advice/
http://www.star-one.org.uk/computer/format.htm
http://www.usenet.org.uk/ukpost.html#s3
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html

http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/quot_ord.txt
http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/quoting.txt


Or, my favorite:

A: Yes.
>Q: Are you sure?
>>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>>Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?


--                 
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

      The desire to understand 
is sometimes far less intelligent than
     the inability to understand

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]

*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to