Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 00:05:59 +0100 From: Grunff <grunffnopsam.com> Subject: Re: Plastic Bumpers on-line store is open 24x7
Abdallah wrote: > i'm not sure when and why the rule regarding top-posting was initiated, but > i'd really like to know why it is annoying. I really, *really* don't want to get into a top posting argument, but at the same time, I don't want to ignore your question, because that would be rude. So briefly: It's not a rule, it's Usenet etiquette. And it's not top posting versus bottom posting; it's top posting versus context posting. Top posters invariably hit reply in their broken newsreader (usually OE), thereby quoting the whole message to which they are replying, and posting their reply above it. In a complex thread, this can leave the reader with very little clue as to which part of the original message they are replying to. The (universally acknowledged) correct way to post is to break up the origional message into chanks, replying to each chunk immediately below it. This makes it much easier to understand a message without having to re-read the whole thread. From an archiving point of view, top-posting is very destructive. Anyone who uses google groups as a resource will quickly see that threads where top posting dominates, especially long ones, are next to useless. They are the main reasons. There are many, many others. If you really want to learn more, here are some resources: http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote2.html http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html http://www.dickalba.demon.co.uk/usenet/guide/faq_topp.html -- Grunff
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
