Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?

I'm up for reading about JP's EDL experiment and Suspension recalls but
dont want that intertwined with newsgroup etiquette.

Meanwhile trying to find out what's wrong with top-posting...

Personally I remove all reply references by default so that only my
message shows. I use Mozilla Thunderbird and set newsgroup to View
Threads With Unread Only. That way I guess 90+% of server space is not
duplication (if its stored that way...?), i can refer to the original
thread and can flick through the replies without searching top or bottom
or inbetween for the new bits.

That i find convenient, not sure if that's what some people are
referring to as lazy.

If missing out the reply references is difficult for the way others read
my posts I'll add them back in.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:29:02 +0100, charles blassberg
<blassberg@email.com> wrote:

>Meanwhile trying to find out what's wrong with top-posting...

The troule with top-posting is that you read your message and then
what you are replying to. It is much easier on the reader to first
read the post your are replying to and then your added thoughts.

FWIW, it *is* considered poor netiquette to top post.

Dave

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:29:02 +0100, charles blassberg
<blassberg@email.com> wrote:

>Meanwhile trying to find out what's wrong with top-posting...

The troule with top-posting is that you read your message and then
what you are replying to. It is much easier on the reader to first
read the post your are replying to and then your added thoughts.

FWIW, it *is* considered poor netiquette to top post.

Dave

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:29:02 +0100, charles blassberg
<blassberg@email.com> wrote:

>Meanwhile trying to find out what's wrong with top-posting...

The troule with top-posting is that you read your message and then
what you are replying to. It is much easier on the reader to first
read the post your are replying to and then your added thoughts.

FWIW, it *is* considered poor netiquette to top post.

Dave

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 07:58:00 -0400, Dave LaCourse
<dplacourse@pirateaol.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:29:02 +0100, charles blassberg
><blassberg@email.com> wrote:
>
>>Meanwhile trying to find out what's wrong with top-posting...
>
>The troule with top-posting is that you read your message and then
>what you are replying to.

Generally speaking you read the message that's being responded to in
its original place in the thread, where it was originally posted to,
rather than in whatever the respondent chooses to quote of it.


> It is much easier on the reader to first read the post your are
> replying to and then your added thoughts.

In this case, when reading a thead, the quote you are presented with
is simply a quote of what you've only just read in the post above.
Most users wouldn't have to read this again and instead are faced with
having to scroll past it just to find the respondent's new comments.
Do this for a number of iterations and it soon gets irritating.


> FWIW, it *is* considered poor netiquette to top post.

Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
gets on with it.



andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 07:58:00 -0400, Dave LaCourse
<dplacourse@pirateaol.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:29:02 +0100, charles blassberg
><blassberg@email.com> wrote:
>
>>Meanwhile trying to find out what's wrong with top-posting...
>
>The troule with top-posting is that you read your message and then
>what you are replying to.

Generally speaking you read the message that's being responded to in
its original place in the thread, where it was originally posted to,
rather than in whatever the respondent chooses to quote of it.


> It is much easier on the reader to first read the post your are
> replying to and then your added thoughts.

In this case, when reading a thead, the quote you are presented with
is simply a quote of what you've only just read in the post above.
Most users wouldn't have to read this again and instead are faced with
having to scroll past it just to find the respondent's new comments.
Do this for a number of iterations and it soon gets irritating.


> FWIW, it *is* considered poor netiquette to top post.

Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
gets on with it.



andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 07:58:00 -0400, Dave LaCourse
<dplacourse@pirateaol.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:29:02 +0100, charles blassberg
><blassberg@email.com> wrote:
>
>>Meanwhile trying to find out what's wrong with top-posting...
>
>The troule with top-posting is that you read your message and then
>what you are replying to.

Generally speaking you read the message that's being responded to in
its original place in the thread, where it was originally posted to,
rather than in whatever the respondent chooses to quote of it.


> It is much easier on the reader to first read the post your are
> replying to and then your added thoughts.

In this case, when reading a thead, the quote you are presented with
is simply a quote of what you've only just read in the post above.
Most users wouldn't have to read this again and instead are faced with
having to scroll past it just to find the respondent's new comments.
Do this for a number of iterations and it soon gets irritating.


> FWIW, it *is* considered poor netiquette to top post.

Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
gets on with it.



andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

What he said.



Andy Turner wrote:

> Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
> netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
> gets on with it.
>
>
>
> andyt
>

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

What he said.



Andy Turner wrote:

> Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
> netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
> gets on with it.
>
>
>
> andyt
>

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

What he said.



Andy Turner wrote:

> Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
> netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
> gets on with it.
>
>
>
> andyt
>

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

I currently agree

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

I currently agree

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

I currently agree

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

charles blassberg wrote:
> Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?

Even better, how about not starting a *whole new thread* on the issue!

Sheesh, TWO new threads (neither of which are on the subject of Audi
automobiles) for a meta-discussion.

What next - massive cross-posting? HTML? Binaries?

E.P.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

charles blassberg wrote:
> Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?

Even better, how about not starting a *whole new thread* on the issue!

Sheesh, TWO new threads (neither of which are on the subject of Audi
automobiles) for a meta-discussion.

What next - massive cross-posting? HTML? Binaries?

E.P.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

charles blassberg wrote:
> Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?

Even better, how about not starting a *whole new thread* on the issue!

Sheesh, TWO new threads (neither of which are on the subject of Audi
automobiles) for a meta-discussion.

What next - massive cross-posting? HTML? Binaries?

E.P.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

"charles blassberg" <blassberg@email.com> wrote in message
news:3bn87uF6hcd95U1@individual.net...
> Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?

This is usenet, offtopic is part of the fun time, get used to it.


> I'm up for reading about JP's EDL experiment and Suspension recalls but
> dont want that intertwined with newsgroup etiquette.
>
> Meanwhile trying to find out what's wrong with top-posting...

Top posting is an age old taboo, that was written by the elders

> Personally I remove all reply references by default so that only my
> message shows.

Nice, thats helpfull for others I am sure <not>, remember people do search
in Google groups for help in years to come.

I use Mozilla Thunderbird and set newsgroup to View
> Threads With Unread Only. That way I guess 90+% of server space is not
> duplication (if its stored that way...?), i can refer to the original
> thread and can flick through the replies without searching top or bottom
> or inbetween for the new bits.

Ahhhh I get it now, you want to change usenet to suit your browsing style,
and to support a browser that is used by less then 2% of people.

> That i find convenient, not sure if that's what some people are
> referring to as lazy.

Lazy


> If missing out the reply references is difficult for the way others read
> my posts I'll add them back in.

Have you just posted your first post, to complain about other people posts?
if so you are a troll. You know where the door is.....

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

"charles blassberg" <blassberg@email.com> wrote in message
news:3bn87uF6hcd95U1@individual.net...
> Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?

This is usenet, offtopic is part of the fun time, get used to it.


> I'm up for reading about JP's EDL experiment and Suspension recalls but
> dont want that intertwined with newsgroup etiquette.
>
> Meanwhile trying to find out what's wrong with top-posting...

Top posting is an age old taboo, that was written by the elders

> Personally I remove all reply references by default so that only my
> message shows.

Nice, thats helpfull for others I am sure <not>, remember people do search
in Google groups for help in years to come.

I use Mozilla Thunderbird and set newsgroup to View
> Threads With Unread Only. That way I guess 90+% of server space is not
> duplication (if its stored that way...?), i can refer to the original
> thread and can flick through the replies without searching top or bottom
> or inbetween for the new bits.

Ahhhh I get it now, you want to change usenet to suit your browsing style,
and to support a browser that is used by less then 2% of people.

> That i find convenient, not sure if that's what some people are
> referring to as lazy.

Lazy


> If missing out the reply references is difficult for the way others read
> my posts I'll add them back in.

Have you just posted your first post, to complain about other people posts?
if so you are a troll. You know where the door is.....

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

"charles blassberg" <blassberg@email.com> wrote in message
news:3bn87uF6hcd95U1@individual.net...
> Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?

This is usenet, offtopic is part of the fun time, get used to it.


> I'm up for reading about JP's EDL experiment and Suspension recalls but
> dont want that intertwined with newsgroup etiquette.
>
> Meanwhile trying to find out what's wrong with top-posting...

Top posting is an age old taboo, that was written by the elders

> Personally I remove all reply references by default so that only my
> message shows.

Nice, thats helpfull for others I am sure <not>, remember people do search
in Google groups for help in years to come.

I use Mozilla Thunderbird and set newsgroup to View
> Threads With Unread Only. That way I guess 90+% of server space is not
> duplication (if its stored that way...?), i can refer to the original
> thread and can flick through the replies without searching top or bottom
> or inbetween for the new bits.

Ahhhh I get it now, you want to change usenet to suit your browsing style,
and to support a browser that is used by less then 2% of people.

> That i find convenient, not sure if that's what some people are
> referring to as lazy.

Lazy


> If missing out the reply references is difficult for the way others read
> my posts I'll add them back in.

Have you just posted your first post, to complain about other people posts?
if so you are a troll. You know where the door is.....

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Ronny wrote:
> "charles blassberg" <blassberg@email.com> wrote in message
> news:3bn87uF6hcd95U1@individual.net...
> > Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?
>
> This is usenet, offtopic is part of the fun time, get used to it.

And what's even more humorous is that the meta-discussion couldn't just
reside in the original thread - no, perish the thought - it had to
spawn TWO new threads, including this one! On-topic, LOL.

Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
After all, any preference is valid, right?

:roll eyes:

E.P.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Ronny wrote:
> "charles blassberg" <blassberg@email.com> wrote in message
> news:3bn87uF6hcd95U1@individual.net...
> > Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?
>
> This is usenet, offtopic is part of the fun time, get used to it.

And what's even more humorous is that the meta-discussion couldn't just
reside in the original thread - no, perish the thought - it had to
spawn TWO new threads, including this one! On-topic, LOL.

Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
After all, any preference is valid, right?

:roll eyes:

E.P.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Ronny wrote:
> "charles blassberg" <blassberg@email.com> wrote in message
> news:3bn87uF6hcd95U1@individual.net...
> > Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?
>
> This is usenet, offtopic is part of the fun time, get used to it.

And what's even more humorous is that the meta-discussion couldn't just
reside in the original thread - no, perish the thought - it had to
spawn TWO new threads, including this one! On-topic, LOL.

Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
After all, any preference is valid, right?

:roll eyes:

E.P.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

You're being silly. I suppose you just want to escalate things so that
it will eventually get to a spot where you start to be right.

I gave my audi a good spring cleaning. It seems like a new car now.
First time I ever cleaned it out so well. It's aging well also. I will
mention last summer some paint on the hood was bubbling up from rust. I
showed the dealership and bang, new hood came from Europe and was
painted up to match. No quibbling at all. The area was just the size of
a thumbprint. So I will keep buying Audi!!!
I'll attach a jpeg.
Just kidding.

gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

> Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
> After all, any preference is valid, right?
>
> :roll eyes:
>
> E.P.
>

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

You're being silly. I suppose you just want to escalate things so that
it will eventually get to a spot where you start to be right.

I gave my audi a good spring cleaning. It seems like a new car now.
First time I ever cleaned it out so well. It's aging well also. I will
mention last summer some paint on the hood was bubbling up from rust. I
showed the dealership and bang, new hood came from Europe and was
painted up to match. No quibbling at all. The area was just the size of
a thumbprint. So I will keep buying Audi!!!
I'll attach a jpeg.
Just kidding.

gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

> Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
> After all, any preference is valid, right?
>
> :roll eyes:
>
> E.P.
>

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

You're being silly. I suppose you just want to escalate things so that
it will eventually get to a spot where you start to be right.

I gave my audi a good spring cleaning. It seems like a new car now.
First time I ever cleaned it out so well. It's aging well also. I will
mention last summer some paint on the hood was bubbling up from rust. I
showed the dealership and bang, new hood came from Europe and was
painted up to match. No quibbling at all. The area was just the size of
a thumbprint. So I will keep buying Audi!!!
I'll attach a jpeg.
Just kidding.

gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

> Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
> After all, any preference is valid, right?
>
> :roll eyes:
>
> E.P.
>

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Jules wrote:
> gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
> > After all, any preference is valid, right?
> >
> > :roll eyes:
> >

[top-post fixed to help with clarity]

> You're being silly.

Of course I am. If the logic holds for one, then it holds for all, no
matter how silly.

> I suppose you just want to escalate things so that
> it will eventually get to a spot where you start to be right.

Shhh! Don't tell anyone I told you, but I've been right *all along.*

Have a nice weekend.

E.P.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Jules wrote:
> gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
> > After all, any preference is valid, right?
> >
> > :roll eyes:
> >

[top-post fixed to help with clarity]

> You're being silly.

Of course I am. If the logic holds for one, then it holds for all, no
matter how silly.

> I suppose you just want to escalate things so that
> it will eventually get to a spot where you start to be right.

Shhh! Don't tell anyone I told you, but I've been right *all along.*

Have a nice weekend.

E.P.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Jules wrote:
> gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
> > After all, any preference is valid, right?
> >
> > :roll eyes:
> >

[top-post fixed to help with clarity]

> You're being silly.

Of course I am. If the logic holds for one, then it holds for all, no
matter how silly.

> I suppose you just want to escalate things so that
> it will eventually get to a spot where you start to be right.

Shhh! Don't tell anyone I told you, but I've been right *all along.*

Have a nice weekend.

E.P.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
> Jules wrote:
>
>>gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
>>>After all, any preference is valid, right?
>>>
>>>:roll eyes:
>>>
>
>
> [top-post fixed to help with clarity]
>
>
>>You're being silly.
>
>
> Of course I am. If the logic holds for one, then it holds for all, no
> matter how silly.
>
>
>>I suppose you just want to escalate things so that
>>it will eventually get to a spot where you start to be right.
>
>
> Shhh! Don't tell anyone I told you, but I've been right *all along.*
>
> Have a nice weekend.
>
> E.P.
>
If you searched for this on google the above is for you :o)

Given that my Audi hasn't even arrived yet can I expect Audi owners to
cut each other up on the road and score points against each other until
one dies?

Oops wouldn't like to stray onto another topic in a thread as emotional
as peoples driving habits.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
> Jules wrote:
>
>>gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
>>>After all, any preference is valid, right?
>>>
>>>:roll eyes:
>>>
>
>
> [top-post fixed to help with clarity]
>
>
>>You're being silly.
>
>
> Of course I am. If the logic holds for one, then it holds for all, no
> matter how silly.
>
>
>>I suppose you just want to escalate things so that
>>it will eventually get to a spot where you start to be right.
>
>
> Shhh! Don't tell anyone I told you, but I've been right *all along.*
>
> Have a nice weekend.
>
> E.P.
>
If you searched for this on google the above is for you :o)

Given that my Audi hasn't even arrived yet can I expect Audi owners to
cut each other up on the road and score points against each other until
one dies?

Oops wouldn't like to stray onto another topic in a thread as emotional
as peoples driving habits.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
> Jules wrote:
>
>>gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
>>>After all, any preference is valid, right?
>>>
>>>:roll eyes:
>>>
>
>
> [top-post fixed to help with clarity]
>
>
>>You're being silly.
>
>
> Of course I am. If the logic holds for one, then it holds for all, no
> matter how silly.
>
>
>>I suppose you just want to escalate things so that
>>it will eventually get to a spot where you start to be right.
>
>
> Shhh! Don't tell anyone I told you, but I've been right *all along.*
>
> Have a nice weekend.
>
> E.P.
>
If you searched for this on google the above is for you :o)

Given that my Audi hasn't even arrived yet can I expect Audi owners to
cut each other up on the road and score points against each other until
one dies?

Oops wouldn't like to stray onto another topic in a thread as emotional
as peoples driving habits.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 14:34:20 +0000 (UTC), Andy Turner
<andyt@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
>netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
>gets on with it.

Times have NOT changed. Noticed I clipped all of your message and
mine simply to reply to what is relevent. Go to other newsgroups and
you will find a majority of the people do NOT top post.

I agree with your estimation of quote after quote after quote. That
too is impolite. Simply quote what you wish to talk about. Very
simple. I bet you could do it without even trying. d;o)

Dave

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 14:34:20 +0000 (UTC), Andy Turner
<andyt@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
>netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
>gets on with it.

Times have NOT changed. Noticed I clipped all of your message and
mine simply to reply to what is relevent. Go to other newsgroups and
you will find a majority of the people do NOT top post.

I agree with your estimation of quote after quote after quote. That
too is impolite. Simply quote what you wish to talk about. Very
simple. I bet you could do it without even trying. d;o)

Dave

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 14:34:20 +0000 (UTC), Andy Turner
<andyt@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
>netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
>gets on with it.

Times have NOT changed. Noticed I clipped all of your message and
mine simply to reply to what is relevent. Go to other newsgroups and
you will find a majority of the people do NOT top post.

I agree with your estimation of quote after quote after quote. That
too is impolite. Simply quote what you wish to talk about. Very
simple. I bet you could do it without even trying. d;o)

Dave

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

charles blassberg wrote:
> If you searched for this on google the above is for you :o)
>
> Given that my Audi hasn't even arrived yet can I expect Audi owners
to
> cut each other up on the road and score points against each other
until
> one dies?
>
> Oops wouldn't like to stray onto another topic in a thread as
emotional
> as peoples driving habits.

I guess that maybe top-posting Audi drivers would hold the speed limit
in the passing lane. Since only *they* matter, that's what you could
expect. Or some other MFFY* driving habit. After all, differing
styles must be accomadated.

E.P.

*Me First, Fsck You.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

charles blassberg wrote:
> If you searched for this on google the above is for you :o)
>
> Given that my Audi hasn't even arrived yet can I expect Audi owners
to
> cut each other up on the road and score points against each other
until
> one dies?
>
> Oops wouldn't like to stray onto another topic in a thread as
emotional
> as peoples driving habits.

I guess that maybe top-posting Audi drivers would hold the speed limit
in the passing lane. Since only *they* matter, that's what you could
expect. Or some other MFFY* driving habit. After all, differing
styles must be accomadated.

E.P.

*Me First, Fsck You.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

charles blassberg wrote:
> If you searched for this on google the above is for you :o)
>
> Given that my Audi hasn't even arrived yet can I expect Audi owners
to
> cut each other up on the road and score points against each other
until
> one dies?
>
> Oops wouldn't like to stray onto another topic in a thread as
emotional
> as peoples driving habits.

I guess that maybe top-posting Audi drivers would hold the speed limit
in the passing lane. Since only *they* matter, that's what you could
expect. Or some other MFFY* driving habit. After all, differing
styles must be accomadated.

E.P.

*Me First, Fsck You.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

> I guess that maybe top-posting Audi drivers would hold the speed limit
> in the passing lane. Since only *they* matter, that's what you could
> expect. Or some other MFFY* driving habit. After all, differing
> styles must be accomadated.

I must say I like that post - nice one.

I probably am a top poster / mffy at heart but don't care for holding
the speed limit in that way.

And note I have changed from single posting to bottom posting as I was
prepared to - thanks

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

> I guess that maybe top-posting Audi drivers would hold the speed limit
> in the passing lane. Since only *they* matter, that's what you could
> expect. Or some other MFFY* driving habit. After all, differing
> styles must be accomadated.

I must say I like that post - nice one.

I probably am a top poster / mffy at heart but don't care for holding
the speed limit in that way.

And note I have changed from single posting to bottom posting as I was
prepared to - thanks

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

> I guess that maybe top-posting Audi drivers would hold the speed limit
> in the passing lane. Since only *they* matter, that's what you could
> expect. Or some other MFFY* driving habit. After all, differing
> styles must be accomadated.

I must say I like that post - nice one.

I probably am a top poster / mffy at heart but don't care for holding
the speed limit in that way.

And note I have changed from single posting to bottom posting as I was
prepared to - thanks