Tom Brinkman wrote:
>
> On Thursday 23 August 2001 07:49 pm, Matt Greer escribió:
>
> > This list is doing a good job cracking down on html, now if only we
> > could do the same for top posters.
What is the problem with top posting. It seems to me that usually it is
the only way to keep the message in context (especially if everyone else
on the thread is doing it that way) Shouldn't consistency be more
appropriate than having a war over which end to crack your eggs on?
ShalomOut
Chal
Elder PCUSA
Registered Linux user # 217118
Ducharme's Axiom:
If you view your problem closely enough you will recognize
yourself as part of the problem.
> 'top posting' is appropriate sometimes. I use it sometimes when I
> need to leave the whole post I'm responding to intact, unlike in this
> response where I appropriately only need to include quotes that I'm
> addressing. I move my sig up under my response when top posting to
> signal that I've not added anything below and to try an' save readers
> from scrolling down needlessly.
>
> What's considered much worse by many is leaving pages of the
> original post plus others reponses (often refered to as 'obsolete
> quotes'), and then adding your response on the bottom where it's often
> out of context to the original subject or even the the last comments
> above your response.
>
> The issue with top posting is that a few people don't like it, and
> some over use it. With HTML or anything but plain text, it's nothin
> but abuse and/or ignorance of netiquette and net conservation.
> --
> Tom Brinkman Galveston Bay
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
> Go to http://wwww.mandrakestore.com
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://wwww.mandrakestore.com
