[OT] Re: top posting?
- On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, J. May wrote:
> What is the deal about top posting?From http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html:
Top-posting makes posts incomprehensible. Firstly: In normal
conversations, one does not answer to something that has not
yet been said. So it is unclear to reply to the top, whilst
the original message is at the bottom. Secondly: In western
society a book is normally read from top to bottom. Top-
posting forces one to stray from this convention: Reading some
at the top, skipping to the bottom to read the question, and
going back to the top to continue. This annoyance increases
even more than linear with the number of top-posts in the
message. If someone replies to a thread and you forgot what
the thread was all about, or that thread was incomplete for
some reasons, it will be quite tiresome to rapidly understand
what the thread was all about, due to bad posting and
irrelevant text which has not been removed.
> It appears to be the standard on the other lists I'm on,It has, unfortunately, become standard in the email messages
> including scholastic lists. I hate to shuffle through the
> stuff I've already read to find anything new.
where I work, to the point that no one bothers removing any of
the quoted messages from the bottom of the email (top-posting and
failure to trim messages seem to go hand-in-hand). It can lead
to a message that is over 40 KB in size with a single line of
Also, top-posting can really screw up the ability to read
messages when they are part of a digest of several messages.
One additional note: If the moderator says that you should use
in-line or bottom posting, then you should probably use in-line
or bottom posting.
Lyle H. Gray
gray@... -- text only, please
Shared knowledge is preserved knowledge.