Collin Kidder wrote:
I'm with Thomas. I think that, while inline posting is a good thing, bottom posting is dead stupid and wastes my time. It is far easier to follow a thread with top posting as the relevant text is right there at the top ready to be read.
That sounds more like an argument to not including the original text at all. As far as I'm concerned, in-line posting *with* editing of the text is the *only* reasonable thing to do. Top-posting is lazy, arrogant, and assumes reading material on a recently read thread (so the context is fresh). It offers no advantages when reading a posting after-the-fact or taken in isolation. The reader has to first re-establish the context, which means reading the message from the bottom up. Bottom posting (w/o editing) is only *slightly* less lazy, but doesn't make the assumption that the reader is current on the context, at least. Bottom posting w/o editing forces the reader to wade through old material that isn't relevant, however, to reestablish the context. The argument based on being able to link back up through a thread to get context is a non-sequitur. If one really believes that's the case, then don't include the original text *at all* (whether top or bottom posting) [and see how many people complain about lack of context!] If there is some context that is relevant to what's being added, seeing *just that context* immediately prior to reading the new material is invaluable. [This *isn't* a bottom-posted message - it just looks like one because of the context editing!] -- Steve Wampler -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] The gods that smiled on your birth are now laughing out loud. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
