Posting Top

[Mark]

Are you OK? Me thinks not, so I fixed it for you. You get a double

*PLONK*PLONK*

Buh bye.

[G Henslee]

Plonking is for the spineless.

[HeatMan]

Plonking may be for the spineless, but aggravating you is a lot of fun...

[G Henslee]

You give yourself undue credit. I'm not in the least bit aggravated. Try again bozo.

[HeatMan]

Yeah?

How come you feel the need to change every post?

[G Henslee]

Once againou give yourself undue credit. No need to do anything. Just killing time. Thanks!

How come you feel the need to reply every time?

Try again bozo.

[Phil Munro]

And then there are some posters who quote NOTHING of the original, so it is impossible to tell what their response is about!!

I am a top poster who can be flexible when the thread benefits from it. And it might be worth noting that most browsers allow a default setting to be made so that their response begins either top or bottom, for the user's convenience --Phil

[MC]

I like to see relies posted on top, gets to the subject matter quicker than having to scroll all the way down on long posts. And then If I need to go back to the original or previous replies I can then scroll down

Anyway, When newsgroups started there was no rule as how to post and most back then was top down anyway.

[Dan C]

That's because you're an idiot.

Riiigghhhtt.... You sure know a lot, huh?

How come you use Outhouse Excuse to post here? I would think a long-time Usenet expert would be using a real newsreader client...

[QB3]

There still aren't any rules. Just frustrated little dorks who like to tell other people what to do. They've been failing at it for years.

Do what you want to do.

[Pop]

And you are a kaner, which is much worse than an idiot, and besides, the logic of the poster is quite on target. If you're actually in posession of any memory, AND were intereseted in that post, you would already know what's in it. You're probably one of those who reads everything just looking for an excuse to asc kanish again. Typical of troll activities, actually, only more of a bottom-feeder.

Actually, there was. It was top posting. Read up on a little history; it's interesting.

Apparently he knows more than you do, that's quyite apparent, and can also think for himself.

Because he has an excellent newsreader; one which is many times more functional, controllable, and current than yours. Show me a perfect newsreader and I'll show you a fraud. Because YOU like to "follow" someone instead of think for yourself doesn't mean anyone else, any period, has to, least of all the poster or myself.

Go back to kaning yourself and you'll feel as debased as your needs imply.

>

[Pop]

Same here. It's quicker and more efficient, especially if you've folloed the thread right along. For the most part however, most newsgroups prefer bottom posting, but the -best- way to post is inline, as I am doing here. You're supposed to trim out the non-relevant parts of the post, leaving only the part you're replying to, for the best clarity. Bottom posting is next "best" (not in my opinion, but ...) and top posting is sometimes frowned upon. In an unmoderated group such as this, there really is no

-best-method and there are no specific FAQs made available to posters to read, and if one is recommended somehow, it's never posted as such until they want to use it to back up their fanspastic claims about what's good and what's bad.

Actually, there were rules when _newsgroups_ first started, and it was top posting. Newsgroups at that time were specialized and pariticpants knew what most threads were about, or they bothered to find out if they needed to understand it more. RFC 1855 at

it pretty well, amongst a couple of other ones, and an FYI. RFC = "Request for Comment" but most today want to use them for gospel, even though most of htem haven't been updated in ten years or more. An RFC becomes an FYI once it's accepted, and then might, never does anymore, become a written standard. Most of the fanspastics who complain about posting methods are pretty ignorant of such things but it's worth knowing just from a historical prospective. There's lots of good info at faq.org; worth checking out, IMO.

In the end, IMO, the proper etiquette is to "do as others are going". OE unfortunately missed the boat on setting Replies for top posting only. There is an OEQuoteFix program that'll fix that, and also add the colored fererences so you can tell at a glance who said what. It works rather well, actually.

For the spastics out there who are going to actually LOOK to see what my client is, you're right: It's Mozilla. It comes up short in a lot of places compared to OE, but at the same time it's got a couple of things I like when I'm going into crapfested territories like the kaners and fanspastics like to try to create. Usually I use OE but chose to use Moz today. So, it's the spastic's problems, not mine. I'm quite happy with my arsenal of tools.

HTH,

Pop

[Pop]

Well, here it's OK, but in groups where it's easy to find their FAQs and especially when they're posted periodically, you should do as the norm requests. If you want to be taken seriously you need to follow established conventions or most won't even bother to read the little words of wit. It's not that big a deal to follow an obvious norm, which is pretty obvious after reading a few posts and lurking for a bit. Otherwise you're abusing the newsgroup, IMO. If I see a trashed thread because of the posting methods employed, well, like many others, I just move on, ignoring that poster.

My 2 cents,

Pop

[Dan C]

Neither of you morons knows the first thing about logic.

There's your "logic" at work, huh? How do you arrive at the conclusion that I can't think for myself, based on what I said there?

LOL! You're completely clueless. Outhouse Excuse is a viral-infected security breach just waiting to happen. Any serious computer user knows that.

There you go again with that stuff. How on earth do you come up with that? What have I done that indicates to you that I don't think for myself. Try to stay on track, will ya?

Sure. Right.

[Jim B]

Make it 91% I just love top posting and will continue to top post.

[Dan C]

Born stupid, and getting dumber every minute. A classic moron.

[G Henslee]

Right.

[Noozer]

Myself as well.

[Dave]

I too will not stop top posting. It's a waste of time always scrolling down to see the replies. If one always wants to read the question that was posted let them scroll down. The subject title ought to be enough to tell one what the question was that was posted.

[G Henslee]

Whoosh! ahh...