On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 09:53, Bruce Roorda wrote: > Bottom posting has not been universally used, but seems to be the most > common practice here.
bg: It is the most common practice on most listservs, because it works better in a multi-poster e-list environment. Bruce: > However, I have seen inexperienced posters berated for top posting by others > who want > to impose their own preferences as rules. bg: That is false. I call BS on it, in the strongest possible terms. It has little to do with "their own preferences", and a lot to do with the original ethos of the Net around multi-poster groups of all sorts. What it stems from is the "one affects many" philosophy, which is essential to keep in our minds when using an e-list. When someone causes potentially hundreds of people to have to exert a little more effort, just to save the one poster a little effort, that is considered rude. Top-posting, in a group environment, usually brings about that result - which is why people will object to it - not because it violates "their own preferences". In other words, Bruce, there are good, valid, Net-historical reasons why an e-list environment will tend to prefer snipping/bottom-posting. It's not about people's individual preferences. Except maybe to the extent that many of us find reading threads in backwards chronological sequence is an annoying time-waster :-) Brewster Gillett -- ****************************************************************** W. Brewster Gillett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Portland, OR USA ****************************************************************** --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
