Toyota, GM, and Ford differences

I just had to hit page down 28 times before I say the start of your new material Mike. It was bottom posted, not interspersed posted.

All the material I scrolled past I have ALREADY read >

Dizzy my mentally challenged fellow.... I criticized bottom posting, and you answered the criticisms leveled by defending interspersed posting. I wasn't attacking that. Interspersed quoting/replying is an excellent method (and I've used it to advantage on many occasion), but it only lends itself appropriate in certain cases. In the remaining cases, top or bottom posting is used. The debate here, is the relative merits of top and bottom posting. You keep demonstrating your lack of intelligence almost daily.

"Mike" is a troll.

Idiot.

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.

You're a top poster. That's proof positive of your stupidity.

Dizzy is a "bottom" who resents ANYTHING or anyone on top.

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

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.

Others have already offered you intelligent counterpoints. A smart person would have picked up on them. What's the opposite of "smart"?

Dave

Our friend DIZZY has done it AGAIN, signed one of his post with one of his aliases and forgot to post anything ;)

mike hunt

I agree with DIZZY, everybody should post on the bottom.

mike hunt

"idiot" is not an intelligent counterpoint. The best argument anyone has made for bottom posting so far is that an assumption is made that the quoted material will need to be read each and every time, and that going below the new material to get to it is too confusing.

I and others have shown that those assumptions are not always true, and in fact OFTEN aren't. Just because someone at Intel wrote a memo and it was posted on a university node as a guide, is not a reason to start bottom posting. I'm someone who deals in the practicality of it and that to me, is that one often (even mostly) doesn't need to re-read quoted material, and that on those times it is needed, it is NOT too confusing to do so.

So if it has come down to an argument of quantifying how often the quoted material needs to be read or to extent it is confusing to look below the new material to see it if it is needed, then we could argue all day. Since I usually have ALREADY read the posts in the thread that are being quoted, I RARELY need to read them over and over again. Also, when I do need to, I don't find it confusing in the least to look below for it. I supposed people's mileage may vary depending on their memory sharpness and reading comprehension skills.

Now tell us how smart you are aga>

That depends on the veracity of the statement. In this case, I think it was more of an observation than a counterpoint.

The best argument anyone

I don't remember anyone saying "each and every time", but I think most times would be accurate.

The only thing that you have shown is that you are too lazy to trim and quote properly.

Just because someone at Intel wrote a memo

It has nothing to do with who "wrote a memo", though you seem to be hung up on that point. Whazza matter, they forget to run it by you, first?

I'm someone who deals in the practicality of it

Yes, it's all about YOU, isn't it. Whatever is easiest for YOU. To hell with everyone else. (especially since YOU didn't write the memo)

them over and over again.

"Since I usually have ALREADY read"

"I RARELY need to read"

"when I do need to, I don't find it"

"I supposed"

See what I mean? It's all about YOU. No consideration for anyone else. I participate in ten different NG's, and read several others. It's not obvious who the new posts are replying to, let alone what the context of the message is, especially in long threads like this one. It is almost always helpful to have a bit of quoted text before the reply to refresh the memory. Otherwise I have to scroll down to get the context and in your case, you often don't trim the quoted material below which makes it even worse.

No point in restating the obvious to a deaf person.

Dave

snipped-for-privacy@ihatespam.net (SgtSilicon) wrote: snip

You 'might' have a point if everyone only addressed one subject in each post but after a thread develops for awhile it tends to wander and branch and with that going on and the posts not necessarily in order one tends to need to skip over the quoted matter a little to see what the subject is.

If everyone would quote just a bit to define what they're commenting on, then bottom posting I think is best