Toyota, GM, and Ford differences

Dizzy, I think I see the problem here. This post of yours says it all. You have a short attention span! You can't remember the last post you read in the string. *LOL*

There's evidence of that short attention span again! *LOL* Dizzy, I am a bottom poster, largely because for some strange reason it is accepted as the norm for news groups. Having said that, I find top posting to be eminently more logical and easier to follow. But this requires that you follow a thread sequence in chronological order (And why wouldn't you?) and have a normal memory and attention span. If I am interested in a thread, it makes absolutely no difference to me whether a contributor bottom posts or top posts. It is the message that is important. So stop your self-righteous flaming and start contributing some value to the group or buzz off! You're being a pest.

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!

Exactly. This Dizzy guy has some apparent real intelligence problems.

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.

Dizzy, my new name for you is "Bottom Poster Bottom Feeder." BTW, you shouldn't need to re-read for context. Even your small brain should be able to get the drift without it.

OH MY GHOD!! YOU POSTED AT THE TOP AND I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU"RE TALKING ABOUT AND TO WHO! I MUST SCROLL DOWN! WOE IS ME!!!

(sarcasm off now!:))

Well, SgtSilicon, it's been many years since I tried other newsreaders, but as I recall the previous one I used (may have been forte) I could never get it to properly open and display images ... OR it may have been frustration with how it handled multi-part binaries.

It was one of those two items, though. J

snipped-for-privacy@ihatespam.net (SgtSilicon) wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@nntp.charter.net:

"351CJ" wrote in news:k6zyf.7184$6L1.2282@trnddc02:

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! ;)

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

Bottom posting is actually the correct form for usenet posting. See RFC 1855. Section 3.1.1

"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.

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.

Then you are an idiot, because top-posting is obviously inferior. At least it seems you may not be as lazy as most top-posting morons.

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.

dizzy, the world is rife with followers like yourself, who do what they are told and who are afraid to try something new. You needn't be afraid of change dizzy. Change is good and is most often for the better. Your words are fraught with anger dizzy. Let go of the past. Stop following dizzy. Be a leader. You can do it. Be an agent of change, not someone stuck in the past "because that's the way we've always done it". If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem dizzy. Be strong little dizzy.

And it seems that you are just another moron troll. dizzy, that last comment of yours could almost be a compliment if it had been said by someone with an IQ bigger than his shoe size. dizzy, rise past your low IQ and join society. It can't be fun always breathing through your mouth.

Dizzy, if it weren't for your vileness, I might actually pity you.

Thanks. I never had problems with binaries before and I don't do much with them anymore anyway. My ISP out sourced their news server and now there are some throttles on transfer rates etc. All still works, just makes getting anything of any size not worth it.

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?

dizzy wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

okay, 15yearold high school troll.

you've been plonked. I'm not wasting any more time on your drivel.