On Fri, Mar 19, 2004, Charles McManis clacked the keyboard to produce:
> Perhaps it isn't "logical", if you've read all the email then the quoted
> thread is just reference anyway. This is the "new stuff". I love being able
> to read mail in the preview-pane vs "next message" , jump to the bottom,
> "next message" jump to the bottom.
> It comes down to opinion I think
> On Friday 19 March 2004 09:46, Louis LeBlanc wrote:
> > On 03/19/04 09:21 AM, Joshua Lokken sat at the `puter and typed:
> > > http://www.google.com/search?q=rfc+top+posting&sourceid=mozilla-search&st
> > >art=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Wow, almost every single reply to the list today was top posted.
> > > People, please know (and you must, you have to read them, too)
> > > that posting replies to the top of an email is, well, counter-
> > > intuitive, hard to follow, and goes against the general grain of
> > > RFC 1855. Please, it has been requested from many users of this
> > > list, do not top post replies, but don't stop sending them ;)
> > Yes, it has been requested from many users, and quite a few have flat
> > out refused to follow this logical norm. Others simply follow the
> > precedent set in any given thread, and some few will go so far as to
> > delete the trailing messages and try to herd an already errant thread
> > in the right direction. For my part, my reply behavior depends on the
> > audience. One would think that a company with so many geeks (from
> > developers to SW architects) would tend to do this right, but not so.
> > Bottom line, don't hold your breath. Unfortunately, many mail clients
> > don't show the replied email during reply composition but place it
> > below the response, and most default to replying at the top anyway.
> > Most users just don't bother to correct it when the option is there.
> > I feel your pain dude.
> > Lou
[format broken, see above and then back down to here]
No, it is not logical. If everyone top-posts, the email must be read in
reverse to recapture thoughts of others or points made. If twleve people
reply properly and you reply the way your `opinion' tells you too, you
have broken the path or reading, by forcing people to jump to the bottom
to refresh the last message and then back to the top to get the latest
thoughts or info. It is also quite obnoxious to review such top-posters
threads that are intermixed when looking through the archives.
Finally, as pointed out previously, it does not follow convention. It is
much like Microsft `enhancing' an industry standard, which actually
breaks the standard.
"Play is the work of children. It's very serious stuff. And if it's
properly structured in a developmental program, children can blossom."
-Bob Keeshan aka `Captain Kangaroo'
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"