Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 20:36:21 -0400, Jules
<dfghsfdgsdfghifdguhsd@sjdfhgskfdhgk.com> wrote:

>Perhaps it is a throwback to the old days. When downloads took so long,
>the person forgot what was being said. So it was nice to have all laid
>out in order, when you got back from the bathroom or what ever. I really
>don't see it being easier to read bottom posting. But then I started
>reading both ways. In fact when I think about it, I like quoted
>references underneath, kinda like a footnote. Like everything else,
>primacy rules. Meaning what you learned the first time, is what you will
>stick to.

Good points, very well put.

The demographics and usage patterns of the internet have changed
massively over the years and this is due in large to the way the
technology is changed. Years ago, people would be on dial-up and would
access usenet once or twice a day. Trimming was much more important
then. Now that people can dip into usenet far more often for shorter
times, a much chattier style of post has emerged - posts that often
contain only a single point. These posts do not require context
quoting, hence top-posting makes the most sense.

Times have changed, that's all.


andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 20:36:21 -0400, Jules
<dfghsfdgsdfghifdguhsd@sjdfhgskfdhgk.com> wrote:

>Perhaps it is a throwback to the old days. When downloads took so long,
>the person forgot what was being said. So it was nice to have all laid
>out in order, when you got back from the bathroom or what ever. I really
>don't see it being easier to read bottom posting. But then I started
>reading both ways. In fact when I think about it, I like quoted
>references underneath, kinda like a footnote. Like everything else,
>primacy rules. Meaning what you learned the first time, is what you will
>stick to.

Good points, very well put.

The demographics and usage patterns of the internet have changed
massively over the years and this is due in large to the way the
technology is changed. Years ago, people would be on dial-up and would
access usenet once or twice a day. Trimming was much more important
then. Now that people can dip into usenet far more often for shorter
times, a much chattier style of post has emerged - posts that often
contain only a single point. These posts do not require context
quoting, hence top-posting makes the most sense.

Times have changed, that's all.


andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 20:36:21 -0400, Jules
<dfghsfdgsdfghifdguhsd@sjdfhgskfdhgk.com> wrote:

>Perhaps it is a throwback to the old days. When downloads took so long,
>the person forgot what was being said. So it was nice to have all laid
>out in order, when you got back from the bathroom or what ever. I really
>don't see it being easier to read bottom posting. But then I started
>reading both ways. In fact when I think about it, I like quoted
>references underneath, kinda like a footnote. Like everything else,
>primacy rules. Meaning what you learned the first time, is what you will
>stick to.

Good points, very well put.

The demographics and usage patterns of the internet have changed
massively over the years and this is due in large to the way the
technology is changed. Years ago, people would be on dial-up and would
access usenet once or twice a day. Trimming was much more important
then. Now that people can dip into usenet far more often for shorter
times, a much chattier style of post has emerged - posts that often
contain only a single point. These posts do not require context
quoting, hence top-posting makes the most sense.

Times have changed, that's all.


andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On 9 Apr 2005 20:50:17 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

>
>Mike Buckley wrote:
>> Why not just be an individualist and follow your own inclination,
>rather
>> than what the net police tell you??
>>
>
>Yeah - when your cell rings in a movie theater, go ahead and answer,
>then have a long, loud conversation. After all, whatever *you* want is
>the most important thing.

As Jules points out, these are not comparable situations. Remember
that top-posting is perfectly acceptable to and is the preferred style
for a great many people. That's what makes it a preference. If you
want to find a *correct* analogy rather than the crap you've been
coming out with (which has only served to show you don't understand
the situation), then you'll have to find one where many people prefer
the alternative - which is not the case in your above analogy.


>Or, like most of the rest of us learned before first grade, we could
>imagine that the world does not revolve around me, me, me.

Indeed it doesn't and therefore you can't expect everyone to adopt
*your* preferences.



andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On 9 Apr 2005 20:50:17 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

>
>Mike Buckley wrote:
>> Why not just be an individualist and follow your own inclination,
>rather
>> than what the net police tell you??
>>
>
>Yeah - when your cell rings in a movie theater, go ahead and answer,
>then have a long, loud conversation. After all, whatever *you* want is
>the most important thing.

As Jules points out, these are not comparable situations. Remember
that top-posting is perfectly acceptable to and is the preferred style
for a great many people. That's what makes it a preference. If you
want to find a *correct* analogy rather than the crap you've been
coming out with (which has only served to show you don't understand
the situation), then you'll have to find one where many people prefer
the alternative - which is not the case in your above analogy.


>Or, like most of the rest of us learned before first grade, we could
>imagine that the world does not revolve around me, me, me.

Indeed it doesn't and therefore you can't expect everyone to adopt
*your* preferences.



andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On 9 Apr 2005 20:50:17 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

>
>Mike Buckley wrote:
>> Why not just be an individualist and follow your own inclination,
>rather
>> than what the net police tell you??
>>
>
>Yeah - when your cell rings in a movie theater, go ahead and answer,
>then have a long, loud conversation. After all, whatever *you* want is
>the most important thing.

As Jules points out, these are not comparable situations. Remember
that top-posting is perfectly acceptable to and is the preferred style
for a great many people. That's what makes it a preference. If you
want to find a *correct* analogy rather than the crap you've been
coming out with (which has only served to show you don't understand
the situation), then you'll have to find one where many people prefer
the alternative - which is not the case in your above analogy.


>Or, like most of the rest of us learned before first grade, we could
>imagine that the world does not revolve around me, me, me.

Indeed it doesn't and therefore you can't expect everyone to adopt
*your* preferences.



andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:40:13 +0200, Arne <user@domain.invalid> wrote:

>Once upon a time *Dave LaCourse* wrote:
>
>> 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)
>>
>
>Little guideness (also in my sig):
>http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post

These are only someone's opinions put down in HTML. Bear this in mind.



andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:40:13 +0200, Arne <user@domain.invalid> wrote:

>Once upon a time *Dave LaCourse* wrote:
>
>> 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)
>>
>
>Little guideness (also in my sig):
>http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post

These are only someone's opinions put down in HTML. Bear this in mind.



andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:40:13 +0200, Arne <user@domain.invalid> wrote:

>Once upon a time *Dave LaCourse* wrote:
>
>> 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)
>>
>
>Little guideness (also in my sig):
>http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post

These are only someone's opinions put down in HTML. Bear this in mind.



andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Once upon a time *Andy Turner* wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:40:13 +0200, Arne <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Once upon a time *Dave LaCourse* wrote:
>>
>>> 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)
>>>
>>
>>Little guideness (also in my sig):
>>http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post
>
> These are only someone's opinions put down in HTML. Bear this in mind.
>
>

Supported by a large majority of posters in the groups I participate in.


--
/Arne

Top posters will be ignored. Quote the part you
are replying to, no more and no less! And don't
quote signatures, thank you.