Bob Wood wrote: > 2009/12/14 Steve Haywood <[email protected]>: > >> ... I thought that the idea of list protocol was to assist with the >> communication of ideas. Me, personally, I will not engage with him while he >> continues to 'reply' to a posting by a series of individual comments on each >> element of the posting, rather than write a consistent piece of prose. To my >> mind it's like trying to have a conversation with someone who's constantly >> interupting you, carping about small points rather than address the major >> thrust of an argument. >> >> However I concede that the rest of the list think this is acceptable. > > In the past, when the question of top-/bottom-posting has arisen, > George has said that his preference is for interleaved replies where > points are dealt with one-by-one. It is what I am doing here and is > what Adrian does.
I too prefer interleaved postings. >> However, what they clearly do NOT think is acceptable is his conflating of >> several posts into a single one which he then proceeds to comment on point >> by point until no-one's got any idea of who's said what. Other people have >> commented on this too. > > This system works very well on other groups to which I am subscribed; > I am not sure why it should be any different here. I suspect that the > real objection is that the poster in question is so objectionable in > the way that he seems to be able to be dismissive of several people's > views and, not only to do that, but also to do it all in one post. I've never seen anyone, anywhere do it. Where it really offends me is on Usenet, where he does it all the time. One Usenet it's not just strange, it actually breaks the protocols by causing posts to have the wrong references header. That isn't just technical nit-picking; it actually stops me, in my newsreader, properly navigating round the thread. > As far as I am concerned people should feel equally free to be > dismissive of Adrian's posts. Whether they do that in direct fashion > as I have done or in a more indirect way, such as that used by > roger_millin in a post received while I have been writing this, is a > matter for individuals. Adrian is one person. Who spends a lot of 9-5 time posting views supporting his own, unique, view of the waterways, and for which he has said he works as a consultant. Do we have a view on advertising here?
