The following message is the second in a series of three, intended to show why top-posting is bad. See the previous message (Message ID [EMAIL PROTECTED]) for a version that I consider understandable.
"Bottom posting", where you leave the entire previous message, is only marginally better than top posting. If the text is important, you should be reading it. If it isn't, the sender shouldn't have included it. On the contrary, it shows you what the discussion is about. In this example, I'm answering your points one by one. I'll repeat the whole thing with top posting. Tell me if it's easier to read. Agreed, mixing styles is the worst of the lot. That's a very good reason to insist on one style. What's wrong with the convention we have? I'll answer this message a third time in the style you propose. Tell me if it's easier to read. Greg On Sunday, 21 March 2004 at 19:35:48 -0500, Lucas Holt wrote: > Aside from mailing lists, I tend to be a top poster. I don't like when > people leave the last 12 emails and then bottom post.. i have to > scroll all day. The other irritant is people who actually post in the > middle of messages. That breaks the "FLOW" as well. After someone > replies top or bottom its VERY hard to read. > > How about a new convention. Delete everything but the last reply in > the thread when you send to the list and say bottom post. I can live > with that as a top poster. If I don't have to scroll all day to bottom > post, its not a big deal. > > The bottom line is that people reply. This list is here to help users > with FreeBSD. I'd take an answer to my questions in any format! > > > Lucas Holt > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ________________________________________________________ > FoolishGames.com (Jewel Fan Site) > JustJournal.com (Free blogging) > > 'I try to think but nothing happens' > -- Homer Jay Simpson -- Note: I discard all HTML mail unseen. Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key. See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
