>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? kg> I'm curious about the logic of the above point from Peter's tag line kg> (which I agree with) and applying the same logic to message list view.
kg> Do the anti-top-posting crusaders (or even those that strongly believe kg> against top-posting) also view their message list with new messages at kg> the bottom? kg> <snip> This is the first list I've been on that had such a rigid rule against top posting -- and I go back to pre-internet tech forums on Compuserve. It's not a big deal to me and I certainly don't want to fight about it. I just want to comment. I think it depends on what you're doing. If I'm responding to several specific points in a message I'd want to do as this list requires -- quote each point and respond underneath. On the other hand, if I'm responding to the general idea in a message, I'd normally top post. In this case I view the quoted text as there for reference in case the recipient has forgotten the flow of the discussion. If it weren't for the rules here, I would have top quoted this message. In the latter case, it very much annoys me to have to scroll down past the quoted text to read the response. One especially annoying example was a message in this list that I just read. I had to scroll down below quoted text only to find a "thank you for your help". I think something like this should always be top quoted. As for flow of the conversation, you get that by following the thread. I don't see the need to repeat that flow at the top of each reply -- unless you're responding to very specific points. That's my 2 cents worth. (I also like new messages at the top of my mailboxes -- so I don't have to scroll to the bottom to find them.) -- Wayne King ________________________________________________ Current version is 2.10.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
