GUESS WHAT?

Search for it using Google. Use the parameter "top-posting". Also "netiquette".

It'll explain why it's rude and lazy.

E.P.

You are correct. Top-posting is about being lazy and ignoring conventions of language.

Your reply BELOW mine (correct-bottom posting) proves my point.

E.P.

Ah yes, you appear to have opted to snip all the points and avoid them. Typical behaviour of a top-post whiner.

No haven't whatsoever. I happen to prefer an interleaved style of post, but I'm not so blinkered or stupid as to be unable to handle the styles that other people prefer.

andyt

Why don't *you* explain? You can quote these sites it you wish.

One thing to bear in mind. Just because someone writes their opinion in HTML and posts it on a site, doesn't give it any more weight or make it any more correct than anything anyone might write here.

andyt

Thankyou.

Given that the quotes are provided for reference (as you've already acknowledged, above), which conventions of language does it ignore, and in which way is it lazy?

I might suggest that "lazy" is snipping most of someone's post to avoid all their points as you did with my other post.

It doesn't prove it whatsoever, it just shows what preference *I* happen to have. However, it *does* speak volumes that you're trying to claim support for your point in such a clearly false and untrue manner.

andyt

Sorry boys, I didn't mean to restart Star Wars here. But then again, while I accept that etiquette may be an issue on a few particular occasions - not least on those when you're invited by a member of the royalty, I am at the same time curious as to why Microsoft does not address this with a nice piece of software that would do all the "netiquette processing"?

Well, if you happen to strike gold in that arena, remember whose idea it was first!

JP Roberts

Ahhh, I see now. I thought you were talking about top-posting, and not the quoting part.

Proper quoting is necessary for context. You can call that "reference" if you wish, but without quoting, who knows what on earth you're replying about?

Not everyone everywhere runs a threaded newsreader, you know.

Lazy because top-posters *rarely* trim any of the previous stuff out, and because they can't be arsed to move the cursor to make their replies.

Since nobody reads from bottom to top, it ignores that language convention.

They were not germane to the discussion.

Of course it does. If top-posting were OK, then you'd just post over what you were replying to - but since you reply BELOW the quoted text, you obviously prefer bottom-posting.

E.P.

Since there isn't anything within them that's germane to my point, I'm not going to reply to them. A waste of my time.

written,

Of course you have. You used the natural style that follows language conventions - invented long before the existence of the Roman Empire. Top-to-bottom reading.

In addition, it's accepted usenet etiquette. Top-posting isn't.

E.P.

Because they are already explained in detail on those sites. No need for me to re-type the stuff.

If there was anywhere on the web that actually said that top-posting was preferrable, or even an acceptable alternative, then you might have a point. Almost all folks who write FAQs and the like ask folks to intersperse or bottom-post.

You can argue until you're blue in the face about top-posting being acceptable. But in the end, there's nothing really that supports that view, either in official FAQs, guides to netiquette or normal logic.

I will continue thinking that top-posters are lazy and rude, and not one word of your opinion on the matter will change that assessment.

Since you must have the last word on this, please do so.

Regards,

E.P.

Since when has Microsoft ever produced a 'nice piece of software'?

Outlook - particularly Express - appears to actively discourage netiquette.

There are a number of mail and newsreaders around which do encourage netiquette, by meeting the requirements of GNKSA) Good NetKeeping Seal of Approval). The only such package, for a Windows platform, of which I have any knowledge is Gemini -

I have been using the Messenger Pro software, which spawned Gemini, for many years.

Ah, at least you've *admitted* it by saying you've snipped it because it's not germane to *your* point. My points were strong so you snipped them. It's typical usenet behaviour, you're not the first, you won't be the last. For example, you claimed:

"Proper quoting and trimming eliminate every advantage claimed by top-posters"

I showed you how this was not true, you couldn't argue against it (hey

- it wasn't germane to *your* point, right...), so you snipped it.

Don't assume that people can't see you doing this.

No, really I haven't. However much you ache to falsely claim this support, it simply isn't the case.

The idea that me having one preference somehow means that I discount other people's preferences is quite frankly bizarre and you're not doing your argument any favours by claiming this. In all walks of life, multiple preferences exist alongside one another and to choose and adopt one is *not* to consider any other preference as invalid.

Which is of course what happens in the text of a top-posted message, except the references are supplied below or after - as they often are in printed text, as footnotes or appendixes.

By people who prefer it.

Of course it is, by people who prefer it.

There doesn't need to be any rules here, just a few different styles. Get used to learning a few different tricks instead of expecting everyone to adopt the style that *you* prefer.

andyt

It's the way in which the sentence in the reply is formed. Remember at school when they tried to get you to reply in complete sentences? Let me give you an example. Someone asks the question, "where can I get a good drill"? An answer that requires context would be "B&Q have them", whereas a reply that doesn't require context would be "I was in B&Q the other day, and they've got loads of drills, I'd recommend you go there".

Y'see the difference? That how people know "what on earth you're replying about".

Yeah, and not everyone prefers bottom posting. You can't have it both ways...

Granted, top-posting has a propensity to create trimming issues, but then you should realise that your beef is with trimming, not top-posting - if that's what you want to argue.

It's not a case of not being arsed, it's a case of it not being relevant to the style.

But a top-post *doesn't* require you to read from bottom to top does it - the quote is there for reference, not context. The new text placed at the top is clearly read in top down fashion, just that the reference is supplied below - as they often are in books (as footnotes).

You mean they were not germane to *your* point of view, so you snipped them all. They were strong points which flattened your stance - hence the snip. Perhaps I'll ask you this again, since you clearly wanted to avoid answering it:

"Do you have a problem with people in real life who have different accents to you? Do you ask them to speak in your accent?"

You have the strangest logic my friend! Top posting *is* OK, but that doesn't mean it has to be my preferred style. In all walks of life, multiple preferences exist together.

Or are you really this bigoted in real life - such that any preference that is not your own is wrong?

Wrong, I *actually* prefer interleaved posting, not bottom posting - as my posts clearly show.

andyt

I suppose that they expect you to use your own noggin a little bit. Or they think whatever is good for e-mail makes sense for usenet.

Not your's, unfortunately.

Here ya go:

You're welcome.

E.P.

So now who's lazy? All you have to do is cut and paste and also perhaps offer *your* opinion (rather than someone else's that you've just read).

If I went off and wrote it, would it give it any more authority or gravitas than what I'm saying here? Obviously not. So perhaps consider that when reading what other people put into HTML.

Yes, the types of people that whine about it are also the types of people that run off and create HTML pages about it - it's just another form of whining. The two go hand in hand. Top-posters generally aren't so anal.

You could argue that the prevalence of top-posting comes from the demographics of usenet users having changed over the years. They're not the sorts who are about to start creating websites to back up their preferences - they just get on with it.

How about the legions of people that use it and have no problem with it? It's obviously perfectly acceptable to them. So your assertion "there's nothing really that supports that view", is totally false.

There are no "official" FAQs. No-one who uses usenet has to adhere to any official governing body and therefore no-one is in any position to create anything "official".

Which are simply people's preferences in HTML form of course.

Name me one form of communication that existed before usenet/email where what someone said is quoted back at them by the respondent before they say their reply.

It's lazy that you can only deal with one style of post. It's rude that you expect everyone else to deal with this laziness by only posting in your preferred style.

Why then, when you're willing to state that you will not change your mind regardless of anything that I might go to say, should anyone else change their preferences when you ask them to?

If you're not willing to listen to other people, then you'll do well to convince anyone that they should listen to you.

Hmmm... why must this be about having the last word? It never has been for me. In fact, I'd welcome you to actually put together a decent reply to my points rather than just snipping them all.

andyt

Good point.

Will take a look at this package.

Thanks, Peter

Never to be underestimated, but are you completely certain this is going to meet all of your exacting demands?

Hmm, you seemed to throw up your hands in defeat at not having the software do *all* of your thinking for you, and I help out by supplying you with something to help out.

Uneducated rudeness is easily excused. Purposeful rudeness (along with purposeful ignorance) has no excuse.

Your sarcasm is noted - it is lucky for both of us that I have not actually demanded anything. Lord help *anyone* who expresses an opinion in usenet, huh?

Again, you're welcome, and BTW, thank you for your proper quoting and posting. I actually *do* appreciate readable posts.

E.P.

Didn't know you were the one who were actually "supplying" this! Funny that you can still find the time to write any software at all, since you seem to be totally devoted to Netiquette.

This suits you very well, since you were the one who purposefully diverted from my original post without caring to start a new thread. Were you trying to avoid some of the "thinking" you referred to in the first paragraph?

Sarcasm is always good whenever it's not bitter.

Notice that one of the possible advantages of top-posting is that if you post in reply to any given paragraph and you make a mistake, the whole post may be rendered unreadable. Another advantage is time saving, especially when the posting is very short and therefore the thread easy to follow.

End of thread as regards me.

You're arguing with someone who will nitpick you into the mud. And once there, easily wear you out because it is familiar territory. Like a child always needing to get the last word in. I have concluded that for some, slavish devotion to top posting is a measure of status in their mind as they are the purists of usenet users. It is a geekdoom honour thing. (notice I said "some")

Notice I said, "wear you down" not 'win'. And he will wear you down. By the geekdoom code, that means he won.

I am amused that we all got suckered into this. It really is funny.

Something I am different about, when writing single digits, in a sentence, I always use the word (five) rather than the numeral (5). Not always, such as if referencing some sort of result. A long time ago I was taught it was proper form. The other way was lazy! This is the first time I have ever mentioned it to anybody. And I do it not to lecture but to point out how we carry our preset preferences around with us.

Good luck if you want to pursue this. Get into the spirit of it all and wear a StarTrek uniform or something?

I am walking away feeling I have a renewed sense of humour.

Oh, and Higgybaby, he still hasn't figured it out every time he drives the red car, something bad happens to him. He is just like all of us!

Peace to all.

JP Roberts wrote: