Toyota, GM, and Ford differences

Stewart is only funny to DEMONrat/LIEbrawl losers.

Dizzy, once again you signed one of your aliases to a post. Why do you do that all the time, we know its you LOL

When will you learn that nobody cares what you think?

LOL

mike hunt

Is that why the Camry is the number one selling individual car model sold in the US, everybody knows what's better, but the buy the Camry anyway? LOL

mike hunt

I don't know anything about you, beyond this thread, but it is absolutely amazing to me that you come across like a 15-year old who read somewhere that botttom-posting is the only acceptable way to do it, and you're going to carry your banner all over the usenet. Honestly, you don't like what I say because I re: on top.... killfile me. It's a stupid argument, where you feel your way is the only.

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

thanks. I tried it several years ago, and I seem to remember hating how it handled binaries. I switched to xnews and haven't tried much new since then. J

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

You don't know anything about who, top poster? Oh, I see, you want us all to read down into the post to see who are are talking about, and then go back to the top to try and make sense of your post.

How ironic, coming from the person too lazy and selfish to properly format his post to maximize the quality of discussion. How VERY ironic, from the person who just wants to rant-away at the top, while ignoring all the points of the previous poster.

Wrong again, top-poster. It was immediately obvious to me that "quote and reply" is the ONLY way to have a quality discussion, and that only lazy, selfish idiots think that top-posting is superior.

"Oh dear, I don't want to scroll down." Umm... That's why proper trimming is performed. Just because some "bottom posters" are too lazy to trim does not mean that we should all abandon any hope of quality, point-by-point discussions and start ranting-away at the top.

The fact that you top-post is strong evidence that you have nothing of value lend to the discussion, no doubt.

It is the only correct way. Only idiots think that top-posting is the superior way.

You tried what several years ago, top poster?

Sure wish I knew what "it" was... Oh, that's right - the answer is down below somewhere.

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.