Toyota, GM, and Ford differences

Page 7 of 12  
SgtSilicon wrote:

Exactly what, top poster?

Only idiots think that top posting is superior. You are an idiot, and are unqualified to pass judgement on those of use with brains.

Top posting is inferior for a number of reasons as I have already provided. Learn how to read, you top-posting moron.
P.S. At least leave a blank line between your post and the one that (unfortunately) follows, cretin.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dizzy, if it weren't for your vileness, I might actually pity you.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I agree with DIZZY as well. I think everyone should bottom post
mike hunt
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It has nothing to do with his way. You should look in the mirror, you look like the stupid teenager who thinks walking in the lane of traffic is cool and he will make the cars swerve to avoid him all 130 pounds of him against a 8000 pounds of pickup... Like these disruptive immature kids, you are trying to defy normal convention. Who do you really think "comes across like a 15-year old"?
Top-posting makes your message incomprehensible to many of your readers. In normal conversation, after all, you don't answer to something that has not yet been said.
For your edification, widely observed Usenet etiquette dictates that top posting is absolutely INAPPROPRIATE!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Top posting is not incomprehensible because the content was often recently read in a previous message. The only people it might be tough for are those who do NOT FOLLOW THREADS. If you are one of those people, I suggest you start following posts by thread 1st and not by time stamp 1st.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think I see at least part of the problem here, displayed more obviously by ditszy than your post. I understand and certainly respect your desire to post at the bottom... I still contend it's more labor intensive and wasteful and I choose to not do it that way. I believe my way is better. :)
However, it's not an all or nothing proposition. when the topic is complex enough and there are multiple things to address, I will clip out and insert text after the relevant discussion (just like this). However, self-richeous bottom posters who repost days and days worth of quoted text only to provide 1 thought at the bottom is my specific beef with the topic.

Big deal. Net etiquette can and does change daily as companies change and modify their approach and attempt to make their 'mark' on the internet. my preference to top post single replies is choice. Besides, to quote carlos mencia "i didn't get the f****** memo." with the nettiquette rules I had to follow! ;)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I am not a Usenet historian but I wonder if bottom posting had something to do with relative primitive editing and low bandwidth issues early on in the game. I for one prefer to read top posting in almost every case since I have usually been following the thread and don't want to scroll down pages of comment I have already read. Just imagine how long a single post on this thread would be with everyone bottom posting. And if you are going to heavily edit previous comments you might as well top post and let the reader go back in the thread as needed. I do appreciate specific comments inserted, where appropriate, in a reply.
Since this has become a formatting thread I do have a question. Many of my posts have weird line breaks when they show up on usenet. I am using Outlook express, plain text, Western European (ISO)
Thank You Howard
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Howard Nelson wrote:

See RFC 1855. Section 3.1.1
http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html
"3.1.1 General Guidelines for mailing lists and NetNews"
"If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!"
Top posting was "innovated" by Microsoft when they ignored this (among many other) internet standards.
Posting should follow normal written text (top to bottom) this makes searching the answer to a question possible. You may be searching for something years later and find a thread and need to have it readable.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Howard Nelson wrote:

No. Top-posting is an inferior way to format a post. Bandwidth is not relevant.

That is why posts should be trimmed of the parts no longer being actively discussed. There usually should NOT be any large amount of scrolling to get to the meat of the discussion. Check any of my posts, for examples.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Top posting is SUPERIOR. Bandwidth IS relevant, and so is the idiocy of not trimming quotes.
I have a simple questions for you and other bottom post supporters.
1. Do you agree that reading quoted material is not always needled as it might have just been recently read in its original post?
2. Do you agree that bottom posting will force a reader to scroll past the quoted EACH and EVERY time in order to just be able to read the new material? Barring of course situations where all is visible one screen.
3. Do you agree that IF, the reader does not find it necessary to re-read the quoted material, then having to navigate past it in a bottom posting environment is wasteful?
4. In a top posting environment, If the reader DOES find it necessary to reference the quoted material, do you agree that the effort to do so is similar to the efforts described in #3 above?
5. Since most posts do not fit in a single viewing pane, isn't it obvious that bottom posting will require the reader to scroll on almost every message, whereas top postings only require it when context is not already understood?
6. Is not a system which requires less effort to achieve the goal the more efficient system?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SgtSilicon wrote:

Only idiots think that.

No, it is not, in regards to the the best way to format a post.

Not trimming can be bad, too.

Your use of "not always needed" shows the dishonesty and illogic of your argument.
Of course it's "not always needed". But it IS almost always better.

"Interleaved" posting, like this, is the correct way.

A properly-trimmed post will not have you "scrolling" to get to the new material.

Why do you keep saying "bottom posting", as if the alternative to posting everything on top is posting everything on the bottom?
In any case, no. Keeping some context is a GOOD THING, so can hardly be called "wasteful".
What's "wasteful" is how top posters almost NEVER trim their posts.

Not even close. A properly formatted post, like this one, is of vastly higher-quality, and is more easily understood, compared to successive blocks of text as are left by stupid top-posters.

Are you mentally retarded? This has already been explained (see the very last paragraph of this post).

Making it a REAL pain, jumping down and up to try to comprehend a top post.

The most efficient system is that where the poster properly formats and trims his response to maximize quality of communication. The extra effort by the one person then benefits the MANY who will read the post.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think DIZZY is correct it is not that hard to read all of the other posts, when they are posted often enough but then again if I had posted on the top you would most likely be reading the next message by now
mike hunt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Mike I believe you are being deliberately obtuse, since I know you're not really that stupid. Too bad I can't say the same for SgtSillycon.
Dave
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I am NOT overweight ;)
mike hunt
wrote

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hi Hairy Dave. I'd be glad to go head to head with you in a contest of wits if you think you are so much smarter. If you care to offer some intelligent counter points to my points that's fine. If you want imply I'm stupid then you should try to back it up.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SgtSilicon wrote:

You're a top poster. That's proof positive of your stupidity.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
No, it isn't. Your lack of ability to counter points is though.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SgtSilicon wrote:

I see that you are a liar as well as a top poster. What a surprise.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
We're all still waiting for you to show us how sharp you are. Must be you can't. Now, that's a surprise! LOL.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I agree with DIZZY, everybody should post on the bottom.
mike hunt
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.