Duncan Booth wrote: > James Stroud wrote: > > > On Tuesday 25 October 2005 00:31, Duncan Booth wrote: > >> P.S. James, *please* could you avoid top-quoting > > > > Were it not for Steve Holden's providing me with a link off the list, > > I would have never known to what it is you are referring. I have read > > some relevant literature to find that this is more widely known as > > "top-posting". I'll go with majority rules here, but I would like to > > say that my lack of "netiquette" in this matter comes from > > practicality and not malice. > > No, I didn't think it was malice which is why I just added what I > considered to be a polite request at the end of my message. I assumed that > most people either knew the phrase or could find out in a few seconds using > Google so there wasn't much point in rehashing the arguments. Probably I > should have equally lambasted Ron for the heinous crime of bottom-quoting. > > In general, there are three ways to quote a message: top-quoting, which > forces people to read the message out of order; bottom-quoting which is > nearly as bad because it hides the new comments; and proper quoting in > context where you trim the message and put specific points under brief bits > of context. >
Just to continue this off-topic argument :) - I've never heard the terms top-quoting, bottom-quoting. I've heard top-posting and bottom-posting before (lots). But regardless of however many people use top-quoting and bottom-quoting, surely you're using them the wrong way around? If I top-post, then that means that the quote is at the bottom, no? To quote someone's sig block: "To top-post is human, to bottom-post and snip is sublime." Iain -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list