On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 11:15, Fred Goldstein <fgoldst...@ionary.com> wrote:
> (top posted) > > Often that works, Sam. When it's a simple dialogue over one issue, then > sure, top posting works. Where insertion-posting works better is when > replying to individual paragraphs or sections separately. I have been > known to write very long emails, as have some of my correspondents... and > this way the specific points are answered in situ. > Some folks have been using email since the late 70s, before there was really such a thing as a full-screen text editor (may the spirits have mercy upon you if you remember edlin, for instance), which explains bottom-posting (it was the only viable way to do it). Inline posting seems more common among people who started communicating online in the 80s (it was common in Fidonet BBS messaging), and when emails took several days to get from one place to another, the context probably was valuable to help you remember where you were in a discussion. Top-posting became more common when email became more accessible to the general public, along with the rise of the Internet generally, probably starting in the early 1990s. This doesn't explain why I prefer bottom-posting, as I'm too young to remember anything before the mid-90s, but (shrug) David Smith MVN.net
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
