If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
A. People who complain about top/bottom posting instead of learning how to
scroll g. -- Terry Kreft MVP Microsoft Access "Trevor Best" wrote in message ... David Schofield wrote: What's top posting? David :-) A: Top-Posting Q: What's the most annoying thing on usenet? -- This sig left intentionally blank |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
This may be straying from the original topic (but then who hasn't in this
thread :-), but I have a serious question. Like David, I didn't understand the reference to "top posting". Nor Trevor's response -- at first (but I got it eventually :-). I have noted in this and other NGs that some people respond above the previous post(s), some below. And of course with long and complex posts, it makes sense to embed parts of the response next to the relevant parts of the previous post. But apart from that the comments in this thread suggest that there is a preference among the gurus for responses at the bottom of the previous posts rather than on top. Is my understanding of this correct? Is there general agreement on this? I must admit that I have been guilty (if that is the word) of "top posting". It has always seemed to me that when reading a thread you don't want to have to wade through all the previous postings over and over again to get to the gem of new information at the bottom. But maybe I have been wrong about this. Of course another issue is: how long do you keep adding to all the previous posts in a long thread -- at what point do you snip off the older posts to keep the new post length manageable? Is there (or should there be) a rule that you keep the last "n" posts and progressively delete older posts than that? Or should this be done on a case-by-case basis in order to ensure that the context of the subject matter remains clear, without requiring readers to have to dig into old posts to make sense of the latest post? In other words, is there an agreed netiquette on replying to posts in regard to top/bottom posting and snipping early posts to avoid bloat? If so, what is it? -- Cheers, Lyn. "Terry Kreft" wrote in message ... A. People who complain about top/bottom posting instead of learning how to scroll g. -- Terry Kreft MVP Microsoft Access "Trevor Best" wrote in message ... David Schofield wrote: What's top posting? David :-) A: Top-Posting Q: What's the most annoying thing on usenet? -- This sig left intentionally blank |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Lyn,
People can get quite vehement about top and bottom posting. Essentially theadvantage of consistent bottom posting is that you can read through the posts in sequence. The advantage of top posting is that when you use a preview pane the previewed content tends to be the last post. On the subject of trimming, you should really trim previous posts to what is relevant to your post, in the past people could get quite nasty about not trimming posts, this has become less of an issue though since the advent of fast internet links and large storage space. Personally I'm a rabid top-poster and trim when I remember to do so, speaking of which -- Terry Kreft MVP Microsoft Access "Lyn" wrote in message ... This may be straying from the original topic (but then who hasn't in this thread :-), but I have a serious question. Like David, I didn't understand the reference to "top posting". Nor Trevor's response -- at first (but I got it eventually :-). I have noted in this and other NGs that some people respond above the previous post(s), some below. And of course with long and complex posts, it SNIP Is there general agreement on this? SNIP Of course another issue is: how long do you keep adding to all the previous posts in a long thread -- SNIP In other words, is there an agreed netiquette on replying to posts in regard to top/bottom posting and snipping early posts to avoid bloat? If so, what is it? -- Cheers, Lyn. "Terry Kreft" wrote in message ... A. People who complain about top/bottom posting instead of learning how to scroll g. -- Terry Kreft MVP Microsoft Access "Trevor Best" wrote in message ... David Schofield wrote: What's top posting? David :-) A: Top-Posting Q: What's the most annoying thing on usenet? -- This sig left intentionally blank |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 23:09:33 +1100, "Lyn"
wrote: In other words, is there an agreed netiquette on replying to posts in regard to top/bottom posting and snipping early posts to avoid bloat? If so, what is it? This argument has been going on as long as Usenet has existed. It sometimes attains the intensity of a religious war. Most old Usenet hands prefer (with varying degrees of vehemence) bottom posting in order to maintain chronological order within a message; many other folks prefer top posting, for one because many newsreaders (including the widely used Outlook Express) default to set the cursor there, and for the reason you cite: being able to see the reply without scrolling down. There's no answer that will satisfy everyone, and there are vehement opinions both ways. Personally, I try to trim and either bottom post or interpost, but depending on the situation, I'll sometimes just do a quick toppost. I'm therefore despised and denigrated by the fanatics in both camps. g John W. Vinson[MVP] |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Terry Kreft wrote:
People can get quite vehement about top and bottom posting. What about eliminating newsgroups from a multi-posted article when replying? |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
rkc wrote:
Terry Kreft wrote: People can get quite vehement about top and bottom posting. What about eliminating newsgroups from a multi-posted article when replying? Crossposting is only frowned upon when the number of groups is excessive. As this one only has four groups I would say it's fine (albeit at the high end of fine). -- I don't check the Email account attached to this message. Send instead to... RBrandt at Hunter dot com |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Rick Brandt wrote:
rkc wrote: Terry Kreft wrote: People can get quite vehement about top and bottom posting. What about eliminating newsgroups from a multi-posted article when replying? Crossposting is only frowned upon when the number of groups is excessive. As this one only has four groups I would say it's fine (albeit at the high end of fine). O.K. I asked that wrong. Is it bad form to remove newsgroups from a cross-posted article when replying to it. I tend to remove the groups I don't read. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
O.K. I asked that wrong. Is it bad form to remove newsgroups from a cross-posted article when replying to it. I tend to remove the groups I don't read. Remove any group you like. A person should be watching any group they post to. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Terry Kreft wrote:
Lyn, People can get quite vehement about top and bottom posting. Essentially theadvantage of consistent bottom posting is that you can read through the posts in sequence. The advantage of top posting is that when you use a preview pane the previewed content tends to be the last post. Lazybones :-) On the subject of trimming, you should really trim previous posts to what is relevant to your post, in the past people could get quite nasty about not trimming posts, this has become less of an issue though since the advent of fast internet links and large storage space. Now it's the people who normally smite the non-snippers getting lazy :-) Personally I'm a rabid top-poster and trim when I remember to do so, speaking of which On the subject of the vehement discussions (negotiations with a light sabre? g) I don't usually smite top posters but if ask my opinion I give it :-) Well, at least your sig sep works so your quoted post was automatically snipped :-) I also hate people who end every paragraph with a smiley :-) -- This sig left intentionally blank |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
"John Vinson" wrote in message
... On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 23:09:33 +1100, "Lyn" wrote: In other words, is there an agreed netiquette on replying to posts in regard to top/bottom posting and snipping early posts to avoid bloat? If so, what is it? This argument has been going on as long as Usenet has existed. It sometimes attains the intensity of a religious war. Most old Usenet hands prefer (with varying degrees of vehemence) bottom posting in order to maintain chronological order within a message; many other Personally speaking..... I'm all for compromise. folks prefer top posting, for one because many newsreaders (including the widely used Outlook Express) default to set the cursor there, and for the reason you cite: being able to see the reply without scrolling down. There's no answer that will satisfy everyone, and there are vehement opinions both ways. Personally, I try to trim and either bottom post or interpost, but depending on the situation, I'll sometimes just do a quick toppost. I'm therefore despised and denigrated by the fanatics in both camps. g John W. Vinson[MVP] |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Jump from Blank screen to slide N during presentation | Yohs | Powerpoint | 3 | December 30th, 2004 07:23 PM |
Excel should allow me to screen scrape the data only | Les Ferrington | General Discussion | 4 | October 18th, 2004 02:25 AM |
Blue Screen; Can't write to drive C: | Felipe Quezada | General Discussions | 0 | October 1st, 2004 04:32 PM |
Some Screen Tips Are Missing | [email protected] | Setup, Installing & Configuration | 3 | June 28th, 2004 09:27 PM |
Print Screen Issues with Dropdowns | JulieD | Worksheet Functions | 0 | June 1st, 2004 04:47 PM |