Top or bottom posting?

Lee B. wrote:
I know that many feel that "internet etiquette" dictates bottom
posting. I suspect, though, that that etiquette evolved before the
introduction of newsreaders and websites that include all of the text
even if that wasn't the author's original intent...

Quoting has been available (possibly always) since bbs's were still a
major thing. The problem is usenet is not a centralized system, like a
web board. A reader can get posts showing up on his individual server
that are replies to the original-- which he still hasn't got yet because
the original was uploaded to a server on the other side of the world, or
had to take the long way around to get to his because of net congestion.
So not every post will be in a nice neat continuum so you (general you)
don't have to read the quotes every single time.

This is not true for specialized groups that are on only one server
(like say, Baen's Bar --sf newsgroups for Baen Books--which houses
itself on news.sector14.net and prefers top posting in all the groups
and makes a point of saying so because the owner of Baen Books prefers
it and he reads the groups, or perhaps your isp hosts some local
newsgroups like your.isp.modems.troubleshooting), as one has to
configure one's reader for that server to get those groups. Post to one
server, and everybody gets it unless someone can't connect to the server
for some reason.

Interleaving helps sustain the illusion one is participating in a
conversation-- not passing notes in class and that can help people
remember that they are talking to a real person rather than 'just a
bunch of pixels'. Most newsreaders can color code the various layers so
that the new text is easily discernable -even OE can do this with a
plugin, and that same plugin can help reformat posts so they look neater
and are easier to read, fixing some of those annoying lacks mentioned
below.

Top posting is an abomination unto usenet-- one perpetuated on the
unsuspecting by MS with their introduction of Outlook Express and it's
inane default settings and their refusal to even attempt to fix areas
that are severely lacking. It makes sense in the context of email and
an office environment, but not newsgroups-- and we won't even talk about
the horror that is html and it's ravening hunger for bandwidth. There
are isps dropping news all the time because of the ever increasing
bandwidth needs crowding and slowing down their other services (mine
did). And we aren't even talking about binary groups.

and before many
internet newbies, who don't know how to cut out extraneous text, had
ready access to the groups.

And some that cut too far. AOL has a bad habit of defaulting to not
quoting anything at all, (and has a non-standard delimiter that most
newsreaders don't recognize so the color coding and quoting don't work
properly when quoting is turned on), so the poster seems to be making a
comment out of the blue with no reference, especially if you have
dropped, blocked, or already read and hidden the post the AOLer is
replying to.

Bottom posting, trimming text, and interleaving all have their
functions, which grew up out of the functioning of usenet itself--
'tradition' doesn't always mean 'unthinking habit' even if you (general
you) don't see the benefit.

revek


---
Checked with AVG
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.547 / Virus Database: 340 - Release Date: 12/2/2003

"revek" wrote in message
...
Lee B. wrote:

snip

Interleaving helps sustain the illusion one is participating in a
conversation-- not passing notes in class and that can help people
remember that they are talking to a real person rather than 'just a
bunch of pixels'. Most newsreaders can color code the various layers so
that the new text is easily discernable -even OE can do this with a
plugin, and that same plugin can help reformat posts so they look neater
and are easier to read, fixing some of those annoying lacks mentioned
below.

snip again

Does Outlook do this? Im tried to work out how to do this in 'help', with no
luck. Can anyone tell me how its done?

Thanks in advance!
Caitlin
PS Bottom posting in most circumstances gets my vote.

CaityH wrote:
"revek" wrote in message
...
OE can do
this with a plugin, and that same plugin can help reformat posts so
they look neater and are easier to read, fixing some of those
annoying lacks mentioned below.

snip again

Does Outlook do this? Im tried to work out how to do this in 'help',
with no luck. Can anyone tell me how its done?

OE-QuoteFix will do the job.
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ and click on
'download' at the top.

revek


---
Checked with AVG
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.547 / Virus Database: 340 - Release Date: 12/2/2003

"Sarah Fox Jahn" wrote in message
...
Hello all,

Small question - which is better for the majority of readers - top or
bottom posting?

With bottom-posters, I use Free Agent which first shows the top of a
post, so I need to scroll to the bottom to see new text. Usually, the
follow-up is after MUCH text quoting.... so I'm inclined to think
top-posting is the way to go. At least from my perspective.
snip

If you top post, it is like getting the answer BEFORE you get the question.

Hence the reasoning behind bottom posting. Especially in such a prolific News Group as
this, with over 500 posts a day, no-one reads every thread, so coming new into a thread,
having the newer comments at the bottom has logic, BUT for gawds sake trim the old stuff
when U make a reply to a thread!

Frenchy

Who has always liked it on the bottom smile

I like top posting.

I myself, don't care. Have been in some groups where it is "law" you
bottom post. Guess you ask the moderator here how they feel. My 2 cents.

Sarah Fox Jahn wrote:

Hello all,

Small question - which is better for the majority of readers - top or
bottom posting?

With bottom-posters, I use Free Agent which first shows the top of a
post, so I need to scroll to the bottom to see new text. Usually, the
follow-up is after MUCH text quoting.... so I'm inclined to think
top-posting is the way to go. At least from my perspective.

The reason I ask was I usually top-post and wonder about how other
peoples' newsreaders are set up.

A geek,
Sarah Jahn

p.s. Hmm, something vaguely kinky about "top or bottom poster". ;-)

i prefer top poasting. i hate scrolling forever for a one word response

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:00:04 -0600, Stan Marks
wrote:

In article ,
(Sarah Fox Jahn) wrote:

Hello all,

Small question - which is better for the majority of readers - top or
bottom posting?

Traditionally, bottom-posting (or, more correctly, inserting your
replies to comments/questions within the quoted text, as I have done
here) is considered to be "normal".

[snip]

Again...learn to [snip] - whichever method of posting (top or bottom)
you choose to use!

I second the whole post, especially the part about snipping quotes.


Ina

213/175/160 since 8/15/03

www.skreee.de

i prefer top poasting. i hate scrolling forever for a one word response
BRBR

Exactly! I often skip posts that go on forever.

(Xray586) writes:

Exactly! I often skip posts that go on forever.

Doing one-word responses for huge posts is not correct behaviour,
either. Please trim your quotes. Top-posting is just laziness from
people who don't want to trim their quotes.
There used to be a way of doing things on the Usenet..