Professional Web Applications Themes

Posting - SCO

Am I out of line to ask that responses to posting contain original posting replied-to messages affixed to the end of the reply instead of the top of the reply. It is really annoying to have to scroll down thru the original post. Anyone else annoyed by this. wj...

  1. #1

    Default Posting

    Am I out of line to ask that responses to posting contain original posting
    replied-to messages affixed to the end of the reply instead of the top of
    the reply. It is really annoying to have to scroll down thru the original
    post. Anyone else annoyed by this. wj



    willjay Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Posting

    willjay typed (on Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 05:15:56PM -0400):
    | Am I out of line to ask that responses to posting contain original posting
    | replied-to messages affixed to the end of the reply instead of the top of
    | the reply. It is really annoying to have to scroll down thru the original
    | post. Anyone else annoyed by this. wj

    I abhor top-posting.

    --
    JP
    Jean-Pierre Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Posting

    In article <KxXlb.47147$bellsouth.net>, willjay
    <com> wrote:
     

    Following the original with the reply is part of the unofficial
    standard of the 'net since day one.

    Another 'rule' that seems to be lost is putting in the entire
    message instead of just the pertinent parts to which you are
    commenting.

    The other standard was that you really should reply in line
    so if there are multiple paragraphs to which you wish to comment
    upon, you place your comments after each of those.

    If a person has not seen the original question have the answer
    first make things hard to follow.

    Read the newuser NG and you'll see what is expected.
     


    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv wjv . com
    Bill Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Posting

    On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:15:56 -0400, "willjay" <com>
    wrote:
     

    Not me. And if you'd ever tried reading a deeply nested thread where
    all the responses were top-posted, you'd see why it's such a daft
    idea. This is usenet, monkey-boy; not email...
    --
    FyRE < "War: The way Americans learn geography" >
    FyRE Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Posting

    On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:15:56 -0400, "willjay" <com>
    wrote:
     
    No you are not out of line.
    But in order to understand why you shoule NOT top-post please read the
    following.

    http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt
    http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
    http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting.html
    http://www.plig.net/nnq/nquote.html

    http://www.html-faq.com/newsreader/?outlook

    http://www.newsreaders.com/


    There are others but this should be enough for you.



    Frederico Fonseca
    ema il: frederico_fonseca at syssoft-int.com
    Frederico Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Posting

    In article <KxXlb.47147$bellsouth.net>
    com (willjay) writes:
     

    Top-posting is generally regarded as evil because it disrupts the
    normal sequence of a thread. The proper procedure is to quote
    just enough of the original message to establish context (which
    can be important if you're new to a thread or haven't read it
    for a while), then follow it up with your reply. If there are
    several points you can intersperse your responses with the original
    text.

    Many people try to justify top-posting by saying that it avoids
    making readers scroll through the entire original message.
    But that wouldn't be an issue if the original text was properly
    trimmed; it's just another attempt to argue that two wrongs make
    a right. Trying to justify not trimming quoted text on the basis
    of laziness won't fly either - if you're not willing to take the
    time to compose a message that's easy to read, why should others
    take the time to decipher it? (I don't - I read too much news
    to waste my time unscrambling poorly-formatted postings.)

    Perhaps the most succinct argument against top-posting appeared
    in a recent .sig from david bonde <i97_bedREMOVETHISi.kth.se>:

    A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
    Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
    A: Top-posting.
    Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

    --
    /~\ invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
    \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
    X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
    / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

    Charlie Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Posting

    What's the matter none of you guys have software that can manage a thread?
    Geeze once you are on topic it's not too hard to follow what's going on.

    "Bill Vermillion" <comREMOVE> wrote in message
    news:com... 
    >
    > Following the original with the reply is part of the unofficial
    > standard of the 'net since day one.
    >
    > Another 'rule' that seems to be lost is putting in the entire
    > message instead of just the pertinent parts to which you are
    > commenting.
    >
    > The other standard was that you really should reply in line
    > so if there are multiple paragraphs to which you wish to comment
    > upon, you place your comments after each of those.
    >
    > If a person has not seen the original question have the answer
    > first make things hard to follow.
    >
    > Read the newuser NG and you'll see what is expected.

    >
    >
    > --
    > Bill Vermillion - bv wjv . com[/ref]


    willjay Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Posting

    Sorry, but I've have always been more inclined to be on top.

    "Jean-Pierre Radley" <com> wrote in message
    news:jpr.com... 
    posting 
    of 
    original 


    willjay Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Posting

    In article <vWfmb.5824$bellsouth.net>, willjay
    <com> wrote:
     

    But I dont really want to go back and read the previous message
    when I find a new message in a thread. And with a thread that
    could be 30+messages long as some of these have been lately
    it's a pain.

    And I do have software that does it and I do follow the netiquetted
    guidlines and have been since 1985 when I used to run a site that
    was quite often in the top-500 transport sites when most of Usenet
    was carried on phones - with only the biggest using dedicated lines
    - usually 9600. I would pick up part of my feeds from GE in
    Daytona beach and their machine 'steinmetz' would be connected to
    'seismo' so things were really pretty fast and we'd get most of th
    major messages in 24 hours - with the rest dribblinf in so 90% made
    it to the final destinations in 3 - days. The ones compoaing about
    top posting - if you look at their names - have been posting to
    these NGs for 10-15 years - though this particullar NG only moved
    from a .biz group to the comp group in the early 1990s.

    You came to our playground so you should play by our rules. We
    were here first.

    And just in case some missed the humor in that statement I'll use
    my 'obvious' smiley. I've used this now and then since about 1988.

    ))))
    ))))
    :::: ))))
    :::: ))))
    ---- ))))
    ---- ))))
    :::: ))))
    :::: ))))
    ))))
    ))))


    Bill

    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv wjv . com
    Bill Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Posting

    As long as the thread stays on topic and doesn't skew into a tangent as most
    of the posts do here.. I believe that top-post with a stay on topic attitude
    would be much more preferable than bottom-post as "because it is tradition
    and it's our playground so you get lost" attitude.

    While you can find many who are in favor of bottom-posts, there are just as
    many who don't.

    wj

    "Charlie Gibbs" <invalid> wrote in message
    news:invalid... 
    >
    > Top-posting is generally regarded as evil because it disrupts the
    > normal sequence of a thread. The proper procedure is to quote
    > just enough of the original message to establish context (which
    > can be important if you're new to a thread or haven't read it
    > for a while), then follow it up with your reply. If there are
    > several points you can intersperse your responses with the original
    > text.
    >
    > Many people try to justify top-posting by saying that it avoids
    > making readers scroll through the entire original message.
    > But that wouldn't be an issue if the original text was properly
    > trimmed; it's just another attempt to argue that two wrongs make
    > a right. Trying to justify not trimming quoted text on the basis
    > of laziness won't fly either - if you're not willing to take the
    > time to compose a message that's easy to read, why should others
    > take the time to decipher it? (I don't - I read too much news
    > to waste my time unscrambling poorly-formatted postings.)
    >
    > Perhaps the most succinct argument against top-posting appeared
    > in a recent .sig from david bonde <i97_bedREMOVETHISi.kth.se>:
    >
    > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
    > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
    > A: Top-posting.
    > Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
    >
    > --
    > /~\ invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
    > \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
    > X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
    > / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
    >[/ref]


    willjay Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Posting

    Bill Vermillion <comremove> wrote:
     

    Unfortunately, I think we're going to lose this battle. Microsoft
    has already set its sites on News: http://aplawrence.com/Blog/B315.html

    --
    com Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: http://aplawrence.com
    Get paid for writing about tech: http://aplawrence.com/publish.html
    tony@aplawrence.com Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Posting

    On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 10:04:35 -0400, "willjay" <com>
    wrote:

    [who cares?]

    "Willjay", as far as trolls go, I've seen a lot better. The "top post
    is best" troll was old 5 years ago; try something original...

    --
    FyRE < "War: The way Americans learn geography" >
    FyRE Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Posting

    On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 16:45:49 -0800, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
     

    It's worse than that, as that's been condensed to fit in a sig. Observe:

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.

    On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 16:45:49 -0800, Joe Poaster wrote: 
    --
    Tom Felker, <com>
    <http://vlevel.sourceforge.net> - Stop fiddling with the volume knob.

    McBride: "I have here in my hand a list of two hundred and five..."

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notice how a four-line conversation is over a page long, and due to
    different quoting styles, it's very difficult to tell who said what.
    Compare this to the alternative:

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    On now, willjay didn't write: 
    >>
    >> Top-posting.[/ref]
    >
    > Why is top-posting such a bad thing?[/ref]

    Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    See, it's shorter, it's easy to tell who wrote what, and nothing comes
    between the question and the answer, which are now in the proper order.

    --
    Tom Felker, <com>
    <http://vlevel.sourceforge.net> - Stop fiddling with the volume knob.

    McBride: "I have here in my hand a list of two hundred and five..."

    Tom Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: Posting

    willjay wrote:
     

    We're not against top posting because of tradition, we're against it
    because it makes a conversation almost impossible to follow.
     

    You're done a survey and determined that exactly 50% of USENET posters
    are on each side of the fence? How else can you make this statement?

    I suspect that if you actually surveyed the readers of this newsgroup,
    you would get:

    about 50% in favor of inline quoting
    about 5% in favor of top posting
    about 45% "go away, stop bothering me"

    My numbers are at least as accurate as yours; also equally made up.

    My own response would be: I prefer inline quoting; don't think it's a
    very big deal either way; and I mainly object to pointless bickering
    about things that aren't going to change.
     
    Bela Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: Posting

    In article <invalid>,
    Charlie Gibbs <invalid> wrote: 

    As to top posting I just had a thought. vi makes it easy to
    reverse it all so we can have messages that look like this.

    Just type :g/^/mo0 [all good newsies use vi] and it's done.
     [/ref]
    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv wjv . com
    Bill Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: Posting

    In article <bne5dn$iq2$std.com>, <com> wrote: 
     [/ref]
     

    When you read the technical groups you'll notice as time goes on
    the truly knowledgable seem to disappear. So as newsgroups
    become the equivalent of the old BBS and CB radio where everyone
    feels they MUST say something whether it is useful or not,
    more and more will move to mailling lists.

    I see many of the almost legendary names in mail lists.
    So as the fuctionality of the NG becomes diminished those who
    used to use it will leave for more controlled environments.

    This is typical off almost all technically oriented endeavors
    where most of the original users of any given group started with
    a certain level of competence at a certain level. then as a group
    they grew better because of the shared knowledge and synergy.

    When more and more people come in asking about fundamentals they
    had learned long ago - the level of posts goes up - the usefulness
    goes down - the level of real exact knowledge gets buried into the
    guesses and workarounds that don't solve the problem.

    At this point, the experts, whether real or self-proclaimed,
    move to other areas for communcations.. I've led some technical
    groups before [not in the computer environment] and for the new
    people who want to learn everyone helps. But for someone to come
    in and expects to be told what to do and not put forth effort on
    their own, they find that if they don't put out effort the others
    aren't going to help.

    Just my opinons based on watching these things from several years,
    so my opinion is just as valid as 50,000,000+ others .

    Bill

    That leaves you with the old "blind leading the blind" problem.

    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv wjv . com
    Bill Guest

Similar Threads

  1. 2nd Posting Can someone please help me with this?
    By murpg in forum Coldfusion - Advanced Techniques
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: August 17th, 04:11 PM
  2. First posting ?
    By MaX in forum Photography
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 29th, 11:09 PM
  3. Top-posting
    By Scott E Robinson in forum PERL Beginners
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: November 6th, 05:04 AM
  4. SORRY for top-posting
    By Andrey in forum Sun Solaris
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: August 22nd, 10:42 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139