* Hill, Greg [Thu, 22 Mar 2007 at 13:01 -0700] > > Top posting isn't lazy or stupid... it's better. I like to see the > most > > recent stuff up front. I bottom post because that's what most other > > people want, but top posting is still better. Of course, I'm not that > > picky either... I'll read what interests me whether it's top-posted, > or > > bottom-posted. If the email has lot's of overhead I read what > interests > > me, and move on. Lot's of header and footer stuff, no biggie - I'll > > just skip it... > > I have a feeling I'll be one of the few on this list to agree with you. > It's a better way, but some people are set in their ways. New > information is first and obviously separated from the old. Any other > method is a waste of time for both the sender and reader. What's worse > is when people whine about other people not conforming to their > preferred method. Get over it, people. If it bothers you that much, > block the sender. > > Greg
So how come when I read Greg's feelings on how top posting was soo much better, I had to scroll down several pages just to see what prompted that silly reply? Von Fugal
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
/* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
