> Don't you think it makes sense to read the question first and then > read the answer below it?
It makes sense to read question and then answer. how else any1 would do otherwise? > If people top-post, they will not remove > unnecessary lines from the original mail. A combination of not > over-quoting and not top-posting is the solution here. The above is quite a subjective issue. Some ppl like me can use snip-in format of reply. This reply to u is a snip without the use of '<snip>' since we have '>' to indicate former response. Some just dont delete former response(s) may be bcos: (a) it is either included by default and/or (b) modifying original reponse is an unethical practice. I think classical semantics (that u r highlighting) do not approve of modifying original either! > I guess people who top-post are plain lazy and don't want to take the > effort to scroll down and remove unnecesaary lines before typing their > message. Top-posting might be fine at your office, but on GNU/Linux > lists, it is looked down upon. Google for it and you will know why. Lazy? -- well that is clearly your point of view and would be incorrect to generalise it. I guess you respond to our posts from Evolution (or other email client) rather than using groups webpage. Since I use the web over email clients I find posts are well sorted by Yahoo and I dont actually need the apporach you are talking about. And if you would google you would also know that web semantics are now moving away from classical approach and may generalise to top-down approach. GNU/Linux lists are quite old and follow the classical approach -- it could be technical or just an approach. > I think Linuxvadapav is the only GNU/Linux list that still approves > messages that are top-posted. Try doing this on other *mature* lists > and you will be flamed, warned, and eventually banned. Flaming, warning, and eventually banning an individual for a writing approach is outright immature when there is no necessity to imeplement it. If you think LinuxVadapav should stick to classical structures, then y host this group here--in yahoo? regards! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
