Hi All, I totally agree with and understand the logic behind the top posting argument. It makes perfect sense to have the flow of conversation chronologically downwards, so reading over a conversation is easy.
But, as we all know, hardly anyone, except for mostly (can't back this up) computer nerds (in the most non-offensive way - I am one of course), actually practice it. Emails exchanged with anyone outside of computer mailing lists (in my experience) always follow a top-post method. I can understand why people do it, as they want the latest most recent answer to be the first thing you see when you open the email and even if you explain the reasoning behind this bad practice, most of the world seem to do it. Not sure where I am going with this post, just a bit of a rant I guess (an old one I am sure) but I find myself going against what I really want to do not to confuse people, or result in them thinking I am a bit stupid for replying at the bottom of an email, or even getting replies saying 'You sent me a blank message' (except for the quote) because they haven't thought to look down the bottom of the page. Do you make a point of bottom posting regardless of the recipient's style? Or do you just stay 'bothered' inside but think 'what's the point' and just top-post? Meh. -- Thanks and regards, Jon Reynolds (j0nr) ---------------------------- http://www.jcrdevelopments.com -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
