Posting Top

[G Henslee]

top posting corrected - look at bottom>

You've just been waiting for a chance to say that, you clever dog you.

[badgolferman]

The most annoying thing on Usenet is not top or bottom posting. It is Off Topic discussions.

[badgolferman]

I

l i k e

t o

s i d e

p o s t .

[World Traveler]

"[snip]

Do more research! You're doing it wrong It should be on the right side :-)

[SteveB]

My vote is for netnannies that piss and moan because they never took the time to learn how to use their filters, scroll up and down arrows, and the delete key.

They read through things, yet bitch, like ordering a steak, eating it, then sending the empty plate back to the chef with a complaint.

Me

[Luke]

Not to worry ... it's in its "last throes". ;-)

[HeatMan]

You're not a net-Nanny, you're an idiot..

[Ashton Crusher]

Don't look now but this is a COMPUTER/VIRTUAL medium, not the printed page. When dealing with additions to printed material AND when dealing with 300 baud modems and only text based display the notion that additions should go at the bottom makes some sense. It no longer makes sense. People using COMPUTERS to read these messages can most easily read the messages if they are top posted when they are these kinds of ping-pong communications.

[Ashton Crusher]

And why you described can just as easily be done with top posting.

[Gideon]

Off Topic.

Please post at alt.usenet.police.wanna.be if you really want to revive this overkilled discussion. This is like the "hanging toilet paper over the top or through the bottom" discussion - half of us are smart and the other half do it wrong. Obviously, the definitions of "smart" and "wrong" are highly subjective. :)

=================

Q: What can I do about this?

A: Some newsgroups by their nature attract people who are not accustomed to following a logical progression of written comments. They either lack the intelligence to do so or are just too lazy. They read and reply to only the last comment without any concern for, or attempt at, understanding previous comments. Often their contribution is useless.

Q: Then why are there some newsgroups with a lot of top posters?

A: Because it destroys the logical flow of a thread of comments.

Q: Why do so many people object to top posting?

A: Writing your reply to a message above what you are referring to rather than below it.

Q: What is "top posting"?

-- Slimes Daily Motto: 1) Tax & Spend 2) Change the constitution to make it easier to do (1).

[Bob G.]

On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 08:15:25 -0700, Ashton Crusher wrote: ========================================

====================================

Even as I bottom post THIS response I have to agree with you at least as far as I personally am concerned... For Me ..... it is easier to top post For Me .......it is a heck of a lot faster to read the "new" reply For Me....... it is a hell of a lot faster

Bob Griffiths

[MUADIB®]

If you don;t know why I posted this entry, please go back and read the prvious post I replied to by G Henslee. He makes good sense. As long as you agree with him.

I actually use a new reader program..........You can get one too. Free Agent is a shareware program. It will keep all the stuff from the last post, and you can follow it by just reading the next post replying to or related to it. It works similarly to a conversation. When a friend of mine and I talk in person, we don't quote everything the conversation started with when we reply. Why should we do any different on newsgroups. People just throw in their two cents worth. It happens in every group I read. If you reply to the proper posting (sub thread or original ) the info should already have been read by the time you read the next entry. Unless you are purging your computer of information all the time and throwing out the baby with the bathwater, this should be simple enough for almost anyone.

I will continue to use my newsreader the way I use it because it works very well, wastes less time, than having to try and read the entire post prior to the one I wish to read when I open a thread(or entry). I generally cut through all the quoted text to eliminate people being put off by having to sift through something they have already read once............ Thinking in conversation mode, not 1989 newsgroup ettiquette, which is how more users actually use the newsgroups anyway.

I learned how to operate my newsreader a little bit at a time. So I have to admit, I didn,t know how manners played into how you entered the post early on. Hell, I didn't know it for two or three years because no one complained about how I communicated, other than how every word I typed used to start with an upper case letter. ( I nevr took typing classes in school and had no guidance in making that selection back then)

There is some good information from you on how it "should be" or used to be. But it is incumbent on the reader of my ppost to understand it. or discard it. I make intelligent remarks, or funny ones, or informative entries. All of which I think are acceptable forms of communication. All of which can be misconstrued or understood, according to the level of intelligence, or lack of, of the individual reading them. As it stands, it is more efficient and uses less "bandwidth" to say what you mean, and not use an extra billionth of bandwidth each time you post, by quoting the same text the reader has already read. This is how it is for me. Hopefully all of us can make decisions based on our own needs, and consider how others will see it, and perform the tasks the way one can or will. I have no disrespect for Mr Henslee's desire to read things his way. However I decline to bend to that desire, as it is mine to decide how it fits my needs also. If my posts annoy anyone, I am sure they can sleep at night without correcting me on how they were entered. If they don' want to read my posts. Delete or kilfile them. Easy enough.

Now, If One decides to killfile my entries, they won' be losing any info of the poster I replied to. Once again,..........makes good sense to me.

Nuff said. ( on this subject anyway....................)

Remove "YOURPANTIES" to reply

MUADIB®

If A Quiz is Quizical, What is a test?

The Peacemaking Meeting scheduled for today has been cancelled due to a conflict.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

Just because others are ignorant and have no ettiquette, you want to be a social boor too? If the guy next to you farts at the dinner table does that mean it is OK for you to fart too?

If the entire world had manners, we would be in a much better state. Self discipline is a good thing, really.

So manners, ettiquette, and socal graces have no part in your life? Everone just does as they please no matter how it affects others?

Snipping eliminates the waste.

To hell with others as long as you are happy. Got it.

To you, perhaps, not the rest of the world.

One more thing. I'm going to post this, b ut leave out all the content you put in and just post my reply. Let me know how much sense it makes to you.

If you are truly concerened about wasting a tiny bit of bandwidth, eliminate everything below.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

USENET and the severs that carry it are not perfect. Threads have missing postings. Theyshould be snipped, but a line or two youd be there for clarification.

In a perfect world, yes, in newsgroups, it does not always happen

.

Just because others are ignorant and have no ettiquette, you want to be a social boor too? If the guy next to you farts at the dinner table does that mean it is OK for you to fart too?

If the entire world had manners, we would be in a much better state. Self discipline is a good thing, really.

So manners, ettiquette, and socal graces have no part in your life? Everone just does as they please no matter how it affects others?

Snipping eliminates the waste.

To hell with others as long as you are happy. Got it.

If my posts annoy anyone, I am sure they can sleep at night

To you, perhasp =not the rest of hte world.

One more thing. I'm going to post this, b ut leave out all the content you put in and just post my reply. Let me know how much sense it makes to you.

If you are truyly concerened about wasting a tiny bit of bandwidth, eliminate everything below.

[Luke]

[snip]

[massive snippage]

New to you, maybe, but Free Agent's been around years. I don't recall when Free Agent was introduced, but Agent was introduced in 1994. I believe I bought Agent that year, and that Free Agent was also available at that time. Free Agent is not shareware, it's freeware. Agent is "trialware", free for 30 days, then either pay or it reverts to Free Agent. And, actually, if you don't know, you're using Agent

2.0/32.652, the latest build of Agent 2.0, released February, 2004.

Cheers!

[Caesar Romano]

Thanks to all who replied. I probably didn't see most of the replies, since I already had about 60 top posters in my kill file. However I knew there were probably a few more of you out there and my "Posting Top" post would bring you crawling out from under your rocks. It works like a charm every time. You top posters are such losers.

BTW, this newsgroup is now very enjoyable and informative with all you losers identified and kill-filed. To those who haven't tried it, I highly recommend you give it a try.

Thanks also to all the others who make this newsgroup so worthwhile.

[George W]

I prefer top posting and I will continue to top post, ignore the self appointed Net Cop.

Cheers and have a nice Independent Day.

[Art Todesco]

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Most top posters don't bother to trim their quotes at all. To be fair, too many bottom posters are guilty of the same. In your case, I don't find the top posting objectionable. I think what really chaps my ass is when I have to scroll.

[badgolferman]

I am a previous top-poster who converted to bottom-posting. I see the value of both and will do both depending on how the thread is progressing. I have learned to be flexible since I can't make others do what I want them to do. Killfiling people for top-posting is really rather petty and you are the one losing out since you are shutting yourself off to a wealth of experience and knowledge. It was through being educated in a helpful manner rather than being called a loser and other names that I decided to change.