Hal Murray wrote:
In article <31033FCF05BEE64695655345F1E94EF015FFD20A@BHW-MBX-02>,
"Mischanko, Edward T" <[email protected]> writes:
When using the mailing list, bottom posting works well. My news client
doesn't seem to put > on my replies though, so I'm not quite sure how
to post, top or bottom?
In their pure form, both top and bottom posting are hard to read.
The right way is to trim the parts of the original message that
isn't important to the comments you are adding.
And, whilst top posting is almost always pure top posting, what is
called bottom posting is, when correctly done, really interleaved, with
comments immediately under the points to which they relate.
It's also nice to wrap your long lines.
Unfortunately Windows email programs, particularly those most favoured
in business environments were designed by people who had no real
understanding of internet email standards and conventions. This applies
to the poor support of ">", as well.
Incidentally, I have come to the conclusion that total bottom quoting
(top posting) or bottom quoting with only complete, very old, articles
removed, is the best way of dealing with bureaucrats, who have no
recollection of the total context other than what is in the mail, and
have no appreciation of traditional conventions.
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
