Derek Broughton wrote in message ...
Crashj wrote:

On or about Mon, 01 Nov 2004 10:12:23 -0400, Derek Broughton
wrote something like:


there are worse things than topposting. (Funny, though)

Tell me about it. Ever hear of Ed Conrad? ;-)

LOL. I hadn't, but Google had. Now I wish I still hadn't. How do you use
the word "pseudoscience" as a _positive_ self-descriptive term?

You lucky innocent. I've been alternately reading or avoiding reading
Ed on talk.origins for over 10 years now. He's one of these life-long
crackpots for whom the invention and popularization of the internet
was a God-send: finally, they could annoy (or entertain) people all
over the world with their obsession, instead of just their immediate
family, neighbours, and the letters editor of the local paper.
Recently, he's been invited to some big conference of pseudo-science
where he'll get to rub shoulders with world-class charlatans like Erik
Von Daniken.

-- Kizhe (dupe and lackey of the Scientific Establishment)

Lt. Kizhe Catson wrote:

where he'll get to rub shoulders with world-class charlatans like Erik
Von Daniken.

Take that back! How can you possibly call Von Daniken a charlatan?

I'm shocked, I say, shocked!!!!! (I almost forgot to include enough
exclamations!!!!!!).
--
derek

On or about Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:54:33 -0400, Derek Broughton
wrote something like:

Lt. Kizhe Catson wrote:

where he'll get to rub shoulders with world-class charlatans like Erik
Von Daniken.

Take that back! How can you possibly call Von Daniken a charlatan?

I'm shocked, I say, shocked!!!!! (I almost forgot to include enough
exclamations!!!!!!).

You forgot "appalled"
--
Crashj

On or about Tue, 2 Nov 2004 19:01:40 -0000,
wrote something like:

None of you get it do you??

TALK FISH. or talk somewhere else.

Fireball

Who's the newbie?
--
Crashj

You are asking me why I don't trim the extraneous junk on my post.... ??
Your supposed to go on to the next post, silly. Not read to the end -
Sheeeez

Nedra

"Crashj" wrote in message
...
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

On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:53:53 GMT, Ann in Houston wrote:

It
eliminates the need to snip, since many people are too stubborn about it. I
don't see that top posting is any worse.

I like people who snip, it means I don't have to pay to download what
I've already read. Having said that my memory is appalling so I like to
see enough to put the reply into context.

--
Regards - Rodney Pont
The from address exists but is mostly dumped,
please send any emails to the address below
e-mail ngpsm4 (at) infohitsystems (dot) ltd (dot) uk

Ann in Houston wrote:

I don't know why, but Fireball's message never showed up on OE, which I
use.

They don't show up here, either. No loss.

I only saw Nedra's quote. Still, I have to ask, if Fireball has to ask
whether Nedra or several others in the discussion even has a pond, he
hasn't shown any interest in actually reading the group. (There - I bottom
posted.

Thank you :-)

But I still like the conversational, email-toned flow of top-posting. It
eliminates the need to snip, since many people are too stubborn about it.
I don't see that top posting is any worse.

The problem is, it _doesn't_ eliminate the need to snip. For those of us in
North America, the actual amount of data coming down the newsgroup feed is
likely unimportant (though there's still a lot of people on slow phone
lines), but readers in Europe still mostly pay by the minute for connect
time. They don't want to download any more data than they have to. For
heaven's sake, even if you must top-post, snip!
--
derek

wrote in message news:4187db05$1@padme....
None of you get it do you??
TALK FISH. or talk somewhere else. Transfer your inane ping pong to
alt.geek ... and I think photos help and should be included in the post
where it
helps - by all means compress the pix as I did to make them small - that
will help ... Fireball

NO PHOTOS!! Yes, I'm shouting because you don't seem to "get it." I'm lucky
because my ISP automatically rejects photos, drawings, pictures, binaries,
whatever else you want to call them, in text-only newsgroups. Look at the
size of a post with a picture and the size of a post without -- many Usenet
users still use dial-up connections, and while most do not now pay by the
minute, it's more than annoying to have a post w/ binaries download for an
hour or so when it could have been posted in a binary group where it
belongs. For garden or pond pix use alt.binaries.pictures.garden; for fish
pix use alt.binaries.aquaria; for fractals use alt.binaries.fractal-art;
etc., then post a message here with a link to the binary newsgroup message.
DON'T POST BINARIES (aka pictures, photos) ON TEXT-ONLY NEWSGROUPS --
compressed or not, they're not appropriate here. Thank you.
--
Zk

TALK FISH. or talk somewhere else. Transfer your inane ping pong to
alt.geek ... and I think photos help and should be included in the post
where it
helps - by all means compress the pix as I did to make them small - that
will help ... Fireball



etc., then post a message here with a link to the binary newsgroup message.
DON'T POST BINARIES (aka pictures, photos) ON TEXT-ONLY NEWSGROUPS --
compressed or not, they're not appropriate here. Thank you.
--
Zk



I made the mistake of posting a pic many years ago when I was very new here.
I didn't know about pay as you go internet. I was sorry not to be able to
do so, though, because it was a nice amenity. Sometimes, though, my reader
couldn't process them and I felt left out not to be able to see the
pictures. For Fireball, you ought to try gardenweb.com and their forums.
They have galleries and no one minds if you post pictures because its web
based. Their aquatic garden forum is a lot like rec.ponds. You have to
register, but it's free, and it has a lot of info on all other kinds of
gardens. Read the list of forums.

"RainLover" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 20:04:48 GMT, "Ann in Houston"
wrote:

Are there some newsreaders out there that
really make top-posting hard to follow?

Some basic standards are needed.

If you want to respond to specific points within a post, the only way
to do that is by quoting, and then replying after each specific
point... what happens when you have top and bottom posts in the same
thread? It becomes IMPOSSIBLE to follow...

I have done the in-line posting when a post was really detailed and it was
warranted to carry on the conversation. I have also read top-posted
messages and had to scroll down to see what came before. But it was an
unusual circumstance. I usually could tell what was going on without it.
Also, I was reduced to reading my groups in archives like the old Deja and
now Google. That format made it pretty moot as far as which was easiest to
follow. It was done in an orderly way that lined out the conversation
pretty well. I just didn't like the delay and the fact that some posts
never made it on. I'm evidently experiencing some of that here, but not as
much. I guess it's just contrary to my nature. When I hit "reply" and the
screen comes up, I don't automatically scroll to the end. I have a thought
on my mind and I have to type it in to be able to remember what I wanted to
say. My efforts to bottom post here have usually involved typing the
message and then cutting and pasting it to the bottom.