On Monday, May 6, 2013, Craig James wrote: > Just out of curiousity, I see comments like this all the time: > > > (*please* stop top-posting). > > I've been participating in newsgroups since UUCP days, and I've never > encountered a group before that encouraged bottom posting. Bottom posting > has traditionally been considered rude -- it forces readers to scroll, > often through pages and pages of text, to see a few lines of original > material. > > The most efficient strategy, one that respects other members' time, is to > briefly summarize your point at the TOP of a posting, then to *briefly* > quote only the relevant parts of the post to which you are replying, and > bottom-post after the quoted text. That lets your reader quickly see if > it's relevant or not, and move on to the next post. > > Contributors in these newsgroups seem to think it's OK to quote five pages > of someone else's response, then add one or two sentences at the bottom ... > it's just laziness that forces readers to wade through the same stuff over > and over in each thread. > > How did the Postgres newsgroups get started with this "only bottom post" > idea? > > (I'm not trying to start a flame war, just genuinely curious.) > > Craig >
Hi, I was curious as well about this topic... I am the one who also be asked (please stop top-posting). And I did - just to respect the rule in community... But, IMO it is something totally irrelevant now-days... With today tools... I understand why such thing has been important 20-30 years ago (in previous century) I use three different tools - on three different devices - and all sort messages by subject then by date... And I think all hide the old messages (on what is reply...) It is always up to reader - what will read and from where... Whatever is the rule top or bottom... I really don't see the difference in reading... In writing - ok, bottom post requires a bit more effort - but it is not that big deal if it makes someone else happy... Cheers, Misa
