On 10 Apr 2005 11:01:53 -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Sure, but by changing the degree, you totally invalidate the
comparison. What I'm saying to you is that top-posting is accepted,
enjoyed and preferred by many people. And you try to compare this with
something that isn't. It's not a valid comparison *because* you have
changed the degree.
Ask yourself this. If top-posting was so bad, made such little sense
and bottom-posting was the obvious way, then why do so many people
top-post? You'd think they'd all be confused and want to change...no?
The *huge* difference is that rude mobile behaviour is only ever
acceptable to the perpetrator and is not something which is welcomed
by others around them. Top-posting on the other hand is not a problem
for *loads* of people. Your comparison is again invalid.
This is the bit you must ask yourself. If it's *so* bad, why do so
many people prefer it and have perfectly good conversations using it?
*Why* is that?
Why would people do this? Do you think that they're being rude on
purpose - to annoy you or something?
Is it *just**not**possible* that they actually prefer the style and
find it easier to use? Can you not appreciate that at all?
Try to appreciate that usenet is just a shared resource where people
post messages that other people see. No-one has to pander to your
preferences any more than you have to pander to theirs. If you have
trouble interpreting their posts then by all means ignore or killfile
them if you want to, but they have no obligation to change their
preference just to pander to those who can only understand one style
Hmm.. you're still showing that you don't understand that it's the
*quotes* that are presented in stack order - not the new text. With a
lack of understanding like this, I'm not so sure as your opinions on
it can really be taken seriously.
I'm not sure of the specifics of your analogy because I'm in the UK
and I dunno what a turn lane is (and presumably the left/right is the
other way around). However, I notice that you present yet another
analogy - if your complaints WRT top-posting are valid, why do you
have to resort to so many analogies just to make your point? Are you
perhaps acknowledging that your complaints don't sound so valid when
presented within the actual topic...
Interesting word you use - "History". Also interesting that you
appreciate that this netiquette has been around "for quite some time".
What you have to appreciate here is that times have changed. The
internet technologies and the demographics and behaviour of users has
changed dramatically in this time. Hence so have people's preferences.
Essentially, you're just behind the times and whining about standards
that seemed important in 1990. Do you still like your web pages to be
static HTML and animated GIFs? Because that's the era you're harking
back to. The RFC's probably contain various things that seem
ludicrously out of date these days.
Learn some new tricks. There's more than one way to make a usenet
post, and neither preference is wrong or invalid. Just another
Someone laying out a post in a stack style really shouldn't be enough
to confuse you, it really shouldn't...
Perhaps it is a throwback to the old days. When downloads took so long,
the person forgot what was being said. So it was nice to have all laid
out in order, when you got back from the bathroom or what ever. I really
don't see it being easier to read bottom posting. But then I started
reading both ways. In fact when I think about it, I like quoted
references underneath, kinda like a footnote. Like everything else,
primacy rules. Meaning what you learned the first time, is what you will
Anybody watch the Magnum reruns on tv? Poor Higgy-baby always stuck
driving the Audi.....Steady on lads.
Good points, very well put.
The demographics and usage patterns of the internet have changed
massively over the years and this is due in large to the way the
technology is changed. Years ago, people would be on dial-up and would
access usenet once or twice a day. Trimming was much more important
then. Now that people can dip into usenet far more often for shorter
times, a much chattier style of post has emerged - posts that often
contain only a single point. These posts do not require context
quoting, hence top-posting makes the most sense.
Times have changed, that's all.
On 8 Apr 2005 21:43:50 -0700, email@example.com wrote:
Different styles of driving *are* accomodated, as are different modes
of transport and indeed different models of car. Since you
(presumably) drive an Audi, do you exect that everyone drives one
since that is your preference? Do you think people that drive other
models are wrong? Do you think motorbikes should be outlawed too?
Incidentally, it speaks volumes that you've bailed out of replying to
any message of mine, yet you're still sniping and whining elsewhere.
You mean like driving 5 under in a passing lane? Or those folks who
swing wide for right turns, blocking two lanes? Folks who stop
needlessly on on-ramps, because they can't figure out how to merge?
Dream up some other legal, but discourteous traffic behavior that suits
the scenario. There are probably thousands. But you get the point.
Unlike you, I support courtesy. You support "if it feels good, do it -
to hell with the rest of you."
Have I ever said that?
Have I ever said that?
Have I ever said that?
It speaks volumes that you are running around a.a.a. humping my posts
trying to goad me into a flamewar. Find another hobby.
On 9 Apr 2005 08:57:18 -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
The only point I see is that you just *cannot* bring yourself to
appreciate that top-posting is a preferred and welcomed style by
thousands upon thousands of people. Your analogies are always wrong
because they are with practices which are either dangerous or entirely
unaccepted. Y'see those are not driving styles that are perfectly
accepted and welcomed by loads of other people. However top-posting
*is* perfectly accepted and welcomed by thousands of people.
Your analogy fails.
If you want to compare top-posting to something else, then you have to
compare it to something which is also preferred by a great many people
- such as motorbikes versus cars.
Again, wrong. You do not support courtesy because you expect other
people to adopt your preferences. It's selfish and it's ignorant.
No, it was a question <doh>. The question still remains - do you
expect that everyone should follow your preference WRT the car you
Again, no - it was a *question*. If you'd already said it, I wouldn't
be asking would I...
Er.. right, once again.. it's a *question*.
However, I think you're perhaps getting the point. To make such
requests based on your own preferences would be ridiculous. I'm glad
to see that in at least some walks of life, you're happy to accept the
choices other people make and don't expect them to make the same
choices as you.
Running around?! LOL!
This is not about a flamewar (have I flamed you *at all*?), this is
merely trying to help you adjust your self-centered attitude with
regard to expecting everyone else to adopt your preferences. Whenever
I back you inter a corner, you bail. However, you then start to whine
elsewhere with the same botched and false arguments. This, as I say,
I would suggest the same WRT your top-post whining. If you hadn't
decided to start moaning about it, I wouldn't be responding now would
I see it just fine. They are in a small minority, and are generally
Heh. Driving the speed limit in the passing lane is not inherently
dangerous, and is not illegal everywhere. Posting in caps or html
might run afoul of some newsgroup charters, but in alt.* groups, most
anything goes. That does not imply that those behaviors are not rude.
It's merely a matter of degree.
LOL. You have just abdicated the argument. Those behaviors are on
display every day, by hundreds of people. And that's just in this
area. In big cities, you'll see multiples of the same rude driving
People still claim the world is flat, that the moon landings were
faked, and that the Earth is 6000 years old.
Doesn't make them any less wrong for holding sincerely onto their false
Riding a motorbike (the mere act of riding) has never been considered
rude behavior. Your analogy fails miserably. Grasp another straw.
If they were merely *my* preferences, you'd have a point. But they
were standards of behavior set long before your or I ever wrote our
first usenet posts.
An attempt at a strawman construction. As are the rest of the
"questions." Again, these standards exist separate of me. The
majority holds them as correct.
If proper posting were merely my own preference, you'd be entirely
correct. But it is not. It is the preference of the majority, and
existed previous to MS Outlook and other wrongly-top-post-default
In matters of ettiquette, I *do* expect people to make the same
choices. That's how a community gets along. I don't clog the passing
lane, and I expect my fellow drivers to do the same. I use center turn
lanes, don't swing wide to turn right, don't left turn into the far
right lane, and all sorts of other driving behavior that helps everyone
(including me) get where they are going with the least amount of
A figure of speech. Finding all of my posts and humping them to pound
Sure, if name-calling or other ad hominem commentary can be called
On 10 Apr 2005 10:31:25 -0700, email@example.com wrote:
As are many preferences. Does this make them wrong? What about
vegetarianism, scientology, people who cycle to work, ethnic
minorities even - are they all wrong because they are minorities? Are
they being rude to us? Should we stamp them all out?
Only by those who are blinkered, self-centred and can only handle one
style of writing (I mean, really - how hard is it?!) . Blimey, I'd
hate to think you conduct yourself with this kind of bigoted outlook
in real life.
And as I've said over and over now, once you change the degree, you
corrupt the comparison. Not only that, but in your analogy you've
switched to a situation where third parties never welcome and prefer
that behaviour, whereas in top-posting - they do.
Why is it, do you think, that you have to make analogies in order for
your complaints to appear to make some sense? If yours were a valid
complaint within the subject, then it would make sense there - without
the need for incorrect and bogus analogies.
Yes, but the point that is *painfully* eluding you is that third
parties do not welcome this behaviour. It's been the problem with most
of your analogies. If you want your analogy to make sense, then you'll
have to find an example of behaviour which you would call rude yet is
cheerfully accepted and preferred by some third parties (not the
person exhibiting that behaviour). WRT a driving analogy, you'd have
to find an example where in many cases, the person behind (ie, the
third party), has no problem at all with the behaviour that you find
to be rude and actually prefers the guy in front to be doing it.
Yeah, maybe some people have a habit of holding onto some beliefs when
other people have moved on...
LOL! Y'see, this is where your blinkers truly reveal themselves. This
isn't any kind of "false belief" - it's only a differing preference!
WRT posting styles, there is no wrong and right, only preferences!
*Exactly*. We all accept other people's choices WRT cars and bikes
even if it's not the choice we would make. Now then, why can't you
accept other people's choices elsewhere?
Actually it served me *beautifully* and I'm hoping it helped you to
see the light. I'm hoping it helped you to see that people make
choices and have preferences all over the place and just because
someone makes a different choice to you, doesn't make them rude (as
you clearly appreciate WRT cars vs motorbikes).
"long before", indeed. And things have changed since then, that's all.
Get with the programme. There are a great deal of reasons why the
modern and more recent contributor to usenet would prefer top-posting.
However, you ignore all this and expect things to still behave as they
did in 1985.
Hmm... you don't seem to understand strawmen. I was *asking* you a
question, not supposing your opinion or answer. This clearly was not
an attempt at any strawman.
Ah, you again avoid answering the question a second time. Funny
that... It's clear that you're avoiding acknowledging that you do not
expect everyone else to adopt your preference of car and perhaps
you've seen the contradiction that puts you in WRT your expectations
Which of course doesn't mean that the minority are wrong - it's just a
Think about this. You will no doubt be in one minority group of some
sort. Have a think about what that is - and how you would feel if that
group was outlawed simply because it was a minority preference and
that the majority decided they didn't like it and it was rude.
It'd be ridiculous wouldn't it...
Of course it is, but once again, that doesn't make the minority
preference wrong, nor give you any right to try and stamp it out.
That'd be ridiculous wouldn't it...
I think most usenet clients leave the cursor at the top of the post
when replying. Agent (the third most popular reader in this group),
If you found yourself in a group where top-posting was the majority,
would you make that same choice then?
A community gets along by not whining to each other about totally
trivial matters such as the way they lay out their posts. A community
gets along when people respect each others choices and preferences.
This Audi community was getting along quite nicely before the top-post
That's great, but as detailed above, your analogy is totally
irrelevant because there isn't a group of drivers that would actually
prefer you to adopt the bad driving behaviour.
Finding all of your posts? I've responded to *various* people here,
it's just that you have the most obtuse attitude towards accepting
other people's choices (and indeed, other people's opinion, as you
In any case, is it a problem for you that I'm replying to your posts?
Would you like me to go away and stop pointing out the holes in your
analogies and the self-centred and blinkered attitude you are
displaying? I'll bet you would...
Right.. so where have I called you any names then? Please quote or
They're the preferences of the majority of course. Which doesn't mean
that the minority is wrong... *remember that* if nothing else.
Of course I can my friend.. but if you weren't top-post-whining in the
first place, I wouldn't have a decision to make now would I...
If you prefer to ride a bike or even walk does'nt disturb me, as long
as you keep your self walking on the side walk or bike on the right
side of the road (especially if me meet eatch other).
But I would not accept if you lived next door to me and choose to have
great partys every night, with loud music and drunk yelling guests.
So accepting other peoples choices when it not disturb others is no
problem. The problem comes when they try to turn everything upside down!
If you like to do a test, start a thread with somebody who
bottom post every other time when you top post between, without
cutting anything. Make 10 posts eatch and look at how stupid it looks,
with all your posts at the first half of the last post.
Maybe you can see the "thread" in it, and you may even do so posting
mails p2p if you like, but news is not for those only who start a new
You make the same mistake as "E.P.", in that your analogy doesn't
apply because there isn't a group out there that welcome and actually
prefer people to be having loud parties with drunk yelling guests next
Top posters don't turn everything upside down, they simply quote for
reference and quote using a stack style.
I'm sure it'll look bizarre - but whose fault would it be? What you're
effectively saying is that one should follow the posting trend set by
the first respondent. Would you do that if the first respondent
So what you mean, is that if some of your other neighbours should not
mind your loud parties with drunk yelling guests (maybe even be one),
that would be ok to have the partys even if all others would mind.
Just because not everybody oppose to it and maybe even like it?
You should do as the custom is on the group you are posting on, bottom
post where it's ask for and top post in groups where that's the custom
to do so. You seam to do so for at least the thread you post in, like
in this. So what's the problem to do it every time?
I don't think you mind bottom posting, you just want to argue and you
reach that by objecting to anything that can cause an argue.
I'm off now. Bye! :)
Not "not mind", but actually *prefer* that there be a loud party going
on next door with drunken guests, than there not be - at any given
Now then, do you know of large groups of people like that?
This is why the analogy fails. You simply have to find something which
large groups of people *prefer*, but which you find objectionable. And
whenever you do that, you're going to hit the same brick wall - that
just because *you* don't like it, doesn't make their preference or
choice wrong and you have no right to try and insist that they adopt
your choice instead.
Of course, like I said to our friend, one has to wonder why in order
to make your point, you resort to analogies that distort the
situation. If your complaint were so valid, then it would be valid by
talking about top-posting, not having to talk about drunken parties.
Nope, because top-posters prefer top-posting *all of the time*. So the
comparative group you are looking for are those that prefer there to
be a loud party on next door than there not be, at any given time.
Ah, you seem to have avoided the question. Here it is again: Would you
continue to top-post in a top-posted thread to avoid the confusion
that your above text shows that you appreciate would occur if you were
to not top-post?
And to answer what you *did* write, would you top-post in a group that
is primarily top-posted? IME in the commercial workplace, multi-party
email threads are almost always top posted, where the newest
respondent puts their reply at the top of the stack. I trust you would
follow suit there then?
I *do* do it every time since that is my preferred style. However, I
appreciate that other people have different experiences and will
choose different styles. It'd be ludicrous for me to think that
everyone will make the same choices as me and I wouldn't expect them
to, nor try and insist that they do.
*Of course* I don't mind bottom posting, I don't mind interleaved
posting and I don't mind top posting. I mean, come on, they're only
style preferences after all... It ain't rocket science!
Sorry, but no. I didn't even start this, the top post whining started
this. I just figured I'd point out the rank hypocrisy, selfishness and
blinkered outlook that top-post whiners generally have.
Oh and incidentally, look at how interleaved posting in this thread
has left the attributions at the top of this post in a complete mess.
It says "On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 23:52:48 +0200, Arne wrote", and yet what
you *actually* wrote on that day doesn't appear until *30* lines lower
down (perhaps off the screen for some people), after various things
that I said, that you said previously, and that "E.P." wrote also.
Top-posting eliminates this problem.
On 8 Apr 2005 13:01:37 -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
If a preference works for a great many people (as top-posting does),
then it must be valid. I don't see thousands of people posting in
all-caps. Your analogy therefore is not valid.
Do you think all usenet posts should be in English, since that is your
On 10 Apr 2005 10:35:53 -0700, email@example.com wrote:
Is this a situation where you'd like them to move out of the way so as
you can drive above the speed limit? If so, then I don't see the
problem and it's amusing to see which behaviour you think is wrong.
This happens all the time in the UK, there are only a few places where
it is frowned upon. In those scenarios it is universally frowned upon
and no-one does it. Hence it doesn't compare to top-posting, which is
welcomed by a great many people.
And by changing that degree, you make it incomparable. Thousands upon
thousands of people enjoy top-posting and prefer it. Who exactly are
*you* to say that they are wrong?
Let's say you happen across a thread where 4 or 5 people have had a
conversation entirely by top-posting. The thread has ended, no-one got
confused and people said what they wanted to say. Now then, what would
be your problem with that? What exactly would these people have done
wrong in your eyes? And, perhaps crucially, what relevance would your
opinion on their thread have to them? Why would they care what you
thought about their thread?
That's good. What about in other language groups?
Oh dear. This is no strawman (especially since I *asked* for your
opinion instead of supposing it), just helping you to see your
Of course, if you want to explain why that was a strawman, go right
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.