On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 10:07:01PM -0400, rob wrote: > Here's what I don't understand about this. It's certainly understood > that most people read downward. However, I'm interested in reading the > test of the mail the sender posted. If there is text included from a > string (to which the poster is responding), I've most likely already > seen it so why would I want to read it again (reading downward). I'm > actually after the "new" text and I'd prefer not to have to scroll down, > sometimes a long way, and sometimes only to see something like "thanks".
If you can read and remember everything that's been said on a list with as much traffic as newbie, your memory is a helluvalot better than mine. I need the sequence to be chronological, old to new, or I just can't follow it. The answer to having to scroll to see "thanks" has nothing to do with top vs. bottom posting and everything to do with the lost art of pruning. And, since people tend to answer questions throughout the mail, one has to read to the bottom anyway. So, seeing "thanks" at the top does not mean you can automatically delete it without paging to the bottom. Skimming is apparently becoming a lost art, too. My wife sometimes top-posts when she talks to me. I have to stop her and tell her to back up because I usually have no idea what she's talking about unless she gives me a little context first. Often it goes back to some story I ignored the first time she told me :) so it's especially important she *not* top post. Also, it's usually easier to find an answer when you search the archives and can follow the discussion in chronological order. That way you don't have to read every message in the thread yet still find the answer. t
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
