![]() |
Why don't you both move this trivial ping pong 'conversation' to a newsgroup
on the topic of news groups? You case then chase your own tails to your hearts content and talk about nothing all day. To read 200 posts you must either have a huge range of hobbies or be a professional news group reader. Do either of you actually have a pond? - Don't answer that, we don't want to know, we are all bored to death. Stick to ponds, fish, building ponds, etc, not the damn style. And as for some of the threads I have seen here about damn elections, rape, and I don't know what!!!! Give us break! Fireball. "Derek Broughton" wrote in message ... Stephen M. Henning wrote: The majority of Usenet-users prefer bottom-posting. In addition to afaik, the majority of Usenet users prefer to read _inline_ posting. Unfortunately, many of them aren't interested in taking the time, either. Bottom-posting is proper Usenet Etiquette. Check out the following URL: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html rfc1855 says _nothing_ about bottom posting. The word "bottom" doesn't even appear. Of course, the RFC itself says nothing directly about top posting either, though it does say "be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a context". The biggest problem with top-, inline- or bottom- posting or is the people who insist on changing the style in the middle of a thread. -- derek |
I agree--top posting makes it much easier to see the new stuff right
off if you're following the thread. Plus it helps keep the attributions straight as people reply. In bottom posting, it becomes increasingly difficult to decipher who said what. Just make sure you don't have an automatic sig added to the bottom of the whole post. Example: Top posting ~~~~~~~~ I agree. -- poster3 On Oct 31 poster2 said: yada yada -- poster2 On Oct 30 poster1 said: blah blah -- poster1 ~~~~~~~~ Example: Bottom posting ~~~~~~~~ On Oct 31 poster2 said: On Oct 30 poster1 said: blah blah -- poster1 yada yada -- poster2 I agree. -- poster3 ~~~~~~~~ Mary On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:13:54 GMT, "Nedra" wrote: The irritating thing about NOT top posting is that this is supposed to be a conversation. I know of no one in a conversation who repeats the people who've just spoken ... that is idiotic.... to me at least. I hit delete if the person has not had presence of mind to edit the previous speakers..... even then Bottom Posting is an irritant - I don't give a hoot what usenet says. Nedrda in Missouri |
Yeaaaaa for Fireball!!! There I voted.
Nedra wrote in message news:418696a2$1@padme.... Why don't you both move this trivial ping pong 'conversation' to a newsgroup on the topic of news groups? You case then chase your own tails to your hearts content and talk about nothing all day. To read 200 posts you must either have a huge range of hobbies or be a professional news group reader. Do either of you actually have a pond? - Don't answer that, we don't want to know, we are all bored to death. Stick to ponds, fish, building ponds, etc, not the damn style. And as for some of the threads I have seen here about damn elections, rape, and I don't know what!!!! Give us break! Fireball. "Derek Broughton" wrote in message ... Stephen M. Henning wrote: The majority of Usenet-users prefer bottom-posting. In addition to afaik, the majority of Usenet users prefer to read _inline_ posting. Unfortunately, many of them aren't interested in taking the time, either. Bottom-posting is proper Usenet Etiquette. Check out the following URL: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html rfc1855 says _nothing_ about bottom posting. The word "bottom" doesn't even appear. Of course, the RFC itself says nothing directly about top posting either, though it does say "be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a context". The biggest problem with top-, inline- or bottom- posting or is the people who insist on changing the style in the middle of a thread. -- derek |
On or about Mon, 01 Nov 2004 10:26:58 -0600, Mark Bannister
wrote something like: Nedra wrote: The irritating thing about NOT top posting is that this is supposed to be a conversation. More and more groups I have noticed seem to be using top posting. It's alway September on the internet . . . http://www.albion.com/netiquette/ -- Crashj |
|
On or about Mon, 1 Nov 2004 19:58:39 -0000,
wrote something like: Why don't you both move this trivial ping pong 'conversation' to a newsgroup on the topic of news groups? Because it is an issue within this group. Usenet has long ago resolved the issue. As new people come on board the problem crops up. Language is not trivial. We are talking about the language and format we use in RP. This convention gets worked out in most usenet groups after a while. Topposting marks you as a newbie or worse in most of the rest of usenet. OTOH, occasional errors are not a reason to flame anyone. If a group has not resolved the issue, you just go with the flow. I put up with it here because there is good information from the regulars and old hats. Few threads in this group go past a dozen or so posts, so conversation confusion is not usually a problem here. If you should wander off to some other groups you may find yourself the subject of endless torment and plonking. Your top posts will be unreadable to regular users and you will find yourself excluded. We are nicer here. Well, I try to be, since I am still using Free Agent. For now. -- Crashj |
On or about Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:12:53 GMT, "Nedra"
wrote something like: Yeaaaaa for Fireball!!! There I voted. Nedra I can certainly understand your reaction and I am fine with you all top posting short conversations, but why won't you trim your posts? -- Crashj |
Derek Broughton wrote:
rfc1855 says _nothing_ about bottom posting. The word "bottom" doesn't even appear. Of course, the RFC itself says nothing directly about top posting either, though it does say "be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a context". "be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message" is the essence of bottom posting. |
wrote:
Why don't you both move this trivial ping pong 'conversation' to a newsgroup on the topic of news groups? Because we were trying to share a little net etiquette with people on this forum like you that top post. |
Crashj wrote:
On or about Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:38:59 GMT, edu (Marizel) wrote something like: Just make sure you don't have an automatic sig added to the bottom of the whole post. A good newsreader will trim a properly formatted sig line. Few here know how to do that, apparently. Mine does. Of course, it doesn't top-post without difficulty, either... -- derek |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:09 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FishKeepingBanter.com