[ale] OT: top-posting

[Geoffrey]

Jeff Lightner wrote:
> "customary"
> 
> There is no "customary" way to do it - simply someone's opinion they are
> trying to assert as "customary".  I'd argue that far more people do top
> posting than any other method so you might say top posting was
> "customary".

Far more people are clueless dweebs as well.

One of the best reasons for properly responding by interweaving 
responses, forces most folks to trim.  Lazy folks who top post will not 
trim anything and you end up with these huges top down threads.  Top 
posting simply forces you to read from the bottom up.

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org] On Behalf Of
> George L. Allen
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 11:52 AM
> To: ale at ale.org
> Subject: Re: [ale] OT: top-posting
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 11:21:33AM -0500, Derrick Norris wrote:
>> The best posting method IMO especially when several people are 
>> contributing to a discussion is to embed comments into appropriate
> spots 
>> in the previous posts.  And of course the worst is when you have a mix
> 
>> of top-posters and bottom-posters.
> 
> I think bottom-posting is best when you're replying to specifics within
> a
> message. As Derrick mentioned above - as described by
> http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html --- "In addition to
> bottom-posting,
> it is customary to leave out non-relevant parts of the message with
> regard
> to the reply, and to put the reply directly beneath the quoted relevant
> parts."
> 
> As I remember, this was the common usage on newsgroups - not to include
> the
> entire previous message and 'bottom post,' but rather to bottom post to
> specific parts, or to 'in-line' post. Then again, newsgroups all nearly
> always read with a reader that knows how to thread messages sanely.
> 
> Outlook won't thread worth a flip - I much prefer mutt.
> 
> Anyway - I think most people now days just hit Reply and type, leaving
> the
> old message in its entirety rather than summarizing. This may be a
> result
> of mail-threading being broken on non *nix clients - or usage patterns
> developed by Outlook. Either way - when in Outlook - top posting is fine
> -
> so I don't have to scroll.
> 
> When in mutt - either is fine - except if 'bottom-posting' I'd prefer
> the
> previous message is cut-down to quotes or summarized so I don't have to
> scroll through 5 pages of text that I already saw in the last message to
> hunt for a reply.
> 
> Bottom posting is probably better for discussion - newsgroups or usenet,
> while
> topposting is quick-and-lazy for two-way conversation.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> ----------------------------------
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.
> ----------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> 


-- 
Until later, Geoffrey

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
  - Benjamin Franklin