On Tuesday 16 November 2004 17:12, Jay Milk wrote:
> I'm a fairly reasonable person, and I have yet to see one good argument
> (and quoting netiquette is not on argument, that's opinion) for
> bottom-posting. To me, it is terribly inefficient and wastes time,
> especially when you hide your post b
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 11:12:49AM -0600, Jay Milk wrote:
> I'm a fairly reasonable person, and I have yet to see one good argument
> (and quoting netiquette is not on argument, that's opinion) for
> bottom-posting.
Try to figure out the following:
| Because she wanted to get to the other side.
On Tuesday 16 November 2004 12:46 pm, Steven Critchfield wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-11-16 at 11:12 -0600, Jay Milk wrote:
> > I'm a fairly reasonable person, and I have yet to see one good argument
> > (and quoting netiquette is not on argument, that's opinion) for
> > bottom-posting. To me, it is terr
On Tue, 2004-11-16 at 11:12 -0600, Jay Milk wrote:
> Apparently, no child was left behind... That's why we can find a lot of
> them here.
>
> My point was, should you have missed it, that I personally don't care
> what your posting preference is. I know what mine is, but I'm willing
> to work a
So, could we just agree to read around our idiosyncrasies and go back to
paying attention to the CONTENT of a message, not its FORMAT?
Discarding messages because they're in the wrong format is equal to
discriminating against another human being based on outward appearance;
be it skin-color, religi
Apparently, no child was left behind... That's why we can find a lot of
them here.
My point was, should you have missed it, that I personally don't care
what your posting preference is. I know what mine is, but I'm willing
to work around yours and scroll more than I would think is necessary. I
