On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 19:59:23 +0100, Walt Davidson
wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:27:56 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:

I will be top posting...

And I will be killfiling you, like all other top-posting fools ....
because top-posters invariably have nothing to say that is worth
reading.

Goodbye.

That's sure a rational connection. Are you sure you don't work
in HR?

If you're keeping up with the conversation, top posting is far
more efficinet then reading the bottom posters who expect ou to scroll
through a hunderd liones oof crap so you can find out their
contribution consisted of "Huh?"


On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 02:07:28 GMT, NunYa Bidness
wrote:

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 17:16:06 -0700, Roy Lewallen Gave
us:

My, that's just too good to pass up. An opportunity to have a title
bestowed by the esteemed and widely respected authority on etiquette and
gee, who knows what else, NunYa Bidness.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
-- now with yet another title, FAI


Like I said before... You seem all too willing to conform to the
standards and practices of the HAM world. What is so different about
this forum, and doing things the way they have always been done here?
Why do you have to blatantly display your unwillingness to conform to
what has long been the accepted practice?

Screw you, and your hypocrisy.
Yet another idiot, you are.
The word for today is CONFORM

Maoist bull****.

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:26:45 -0400, "Fred W4JLE"
wrote:

Retarded is posting profanities. It indicates a lack of vocabulary, and
speaks volumes as to your character.

Bull****. I was once tested and found to have a vocabulary
size comparable only to lawyers and clergymen -- the two
highest-scoring groups. It is expanded, not diminished, by some
hundred or two peofane words.profane words.

Stop your inane whimpering jst because you can't express
yourself well.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:22:32 GMT, NunYa Bidness
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 15:06:54 +0100, "Polymath"
Gave us:

Indeed, the "governing" RFC even went so far as to
state that bottom posting was the preferred method
of the author but that there was no hard and fast rule
about it.

With top posting, you can quickly "thumb" through the
posts with your hand on the "Next" button. With bottom
posting you have to page down through much already-seen
and over-quoted material. The net result is that bottom-posted
articles tend to get skipped without the new material being read
let alone being visible.

If you are skipping posts in threads which you were at one time
reading, you have some serious skills problems that go far beyond your
simplistic laziness to use more than one clic per post. You have the
mentality of a high school drop-out.

What a bunch of psychobabble. Keep your soft science (at best)
off of a technical forum.

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 04:56:16 GMT, NunYa Bidness
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 20:04:00 -0400, Ham op Gave
us:

You haven't given one logical reason to bottom post.

You revert to name calling, insults, IQ assassination, challenging my
IQ, while clearly demonstrating your IQ. Give a positive benefit of
bottom posting, other than that's the way it's done, specially when a
post may be very long, several pages or more, that requires scrolling
through to locate your asinine answer. I could read your answer
immediately and simply ignore it, if it were TOP POSTED.

You do not understand what Usenet is then. It isn't a message board
between two folks having a conversation, it IS a place where such
conversations can benefit any and all that read them. The entire
point of proper posting is so that ANY person popping into the group
for a read, can garner the entire idea of a post *without* having to
go find, download, and plow through a number of others to do it.

**** the dilettantes -- if they're hot to find out what the
top post was about wjen they "pop in", let them get off their lazy
asses and scroll down. I've already read all that crap and don't feel
like scrolling past it for thirty posts in a row.

If you can't keep up with the flow, move to
alt.kindergarten.reading.level.

Help us all out by "popping out".

It
has nothing to do with YOUR convenience and everything to do with the
stray "just walked in" reader. Your attitude about the whole thing is
what is asinine, and that alone is what prompted your much deserved
put downs. In other words, you DO have a reduced IQ if you don't even
have the time to read, learn and follow the protocols and expectations
of a forum you happen to think is some "do as you please" thing, when
it is not, by any stretch. Your convenience is not the issue in any
way.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 14:37:10 +0000, Jock.
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:50:34 -0400, Ham op wrote:

I've used the internet since 1985 [DARPA net] and have yet to see the
11th commandment prohibiting top posting or forcing bottom posting.

I prefer TOP POSTING. I've read the original message previously, it is
stored sequentially on my computer sorted by thread and date if I need a
refresher, and I don't have to scroll through a lot of attached garbage
to get to your meaningful or meaningless comments.

TOP POSTING, IMO, provides much more efficient use of my time.

What's so bloody important about your time?

It's important to me. Let's just settle on -- I'll top-post
and move on; you can just ignore the first few lines and read to the
bottom, then scroll back up to the top to find the really good stuff.


Don't top-post.

73 de Jock.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:18:40 GMT, NunYa Bidness
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:50:34 -0400, Ham op Gave
us:

I've used the internet since 1985 [DARPA net] and have yet to see the
11th commandment prohibiting top posting or forcing bottom posting.

I prefer TOP POSTING. I've read the original message previously


It isn't about what you have read, or what you have stored. Get a
clue.

, it is
stored sequentially on my computer sorted by thread and date if I need a
refresher, and I don't have to scroll through a lot of attached garbage
to get to your meaningful or meaningless comments.

What you fail to realize is that what you have stored, and the
manner which you read Usenet is not how everyone does it. The
protocols (which do exist) are in place to increase understanding of
the post from that very post, without the need to look up or download
additional posts. Are you getting it yet?


TOP POSTING, IMO, provides much more efficient use of my time.

You are what Usenet users that actually know what the forum is about
call LAZY. How hard can it be, and a few seconds is not some critical
number. Are you really that pathetic?


Get a life. There's much more to life than criticizing where a response
is posted.

Funny that the only places idiots like you conform is when there is
no way to get what you want otherwise, or if a cop has a gun pointed
at you. You are the same type of idiot I see here in California that
doesn't stop for stopped traffic. They traverse either to the right
or left like little inertial idiots, or the idiots that wear their
pants down past their ass.

****, dude -- move to a more upscale neighborhood.

(Bottom posted so that you don't have to give up too many of our
precious IQ points to find it.)

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:16:41 -0400, "Fred W4JLE"
wrote:

Glad you enjoy it John, As California is about to fall in the ocean from the
"big one", we should probably enjoy the left wing babble before it becomes a
mere memory...

Bull**** -- at the big one, everything east of CA will slide
into the Atlantic.




"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Fred:

My gawd man, your posts have improved tremendously since I have come here!

right.
A
****in'



On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 00:35:22 GMT, Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI
wrote:

Usenet?
on
it
do
why
so
not
thought
I
backwards?
everything
write
normally
you
Do
NunYa Bidness wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:50:34 -0400, Ham op Gave
us:


I've used the internet since 1985 [DARPA net] and have yet to see the
11th commandment prohibiting top posting or forcing bottom posting.

I prefer TOP POSTING. I've read the original message previously



It isn't about what you have read, or what you have stored. Get a
clue.


, it is
stored sequentially on my computer sorted by thread and date if I need a
refresher, and I don't have to scroll through a lot of attached garbage
to get to your meaningful or meaningless comments.


What you fail to realize is that what you have stored, and the
manner which you read Usenet is not how everyone does it. The
protocols (which do exist) are in place to increase understanding of
the post from that very post, without the need to look up or download
additional posts. Are you getting it yet?


TOP POSTING, IMO, provides much more efficient use of my time.


You are what Usenet users that actually know what the forum is about
call LAZY. How hard can it be, and a few seconds is not some critical
number. Are you really that pathetic?


Get a life. There's much more to life than criticizing where a response
is posted.


Funny that the only places idiots like you conform is when there is
no way to get what you want otherwise, or if a cop has a gun pointed
at you. You are the same type of idiot I see here in California that
doesn't stop for stopped traffic. They traverse either to the right
or left like little inertial idiots, or the idiots that wear their
pants down past their ass.
YAWN! Another 12 year old who thinks he pioneered the universe.

Look up the phrase "**** off".

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:00:00 GMT, NunYa Bidness
wrote:

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 08:02:30 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:

NunYa NumNuts:

Ohh, I know how IT USED TO BE...

I know that you're an idiot.

Some just don't realize HOW IT IS NOW.

That'd be you as well. Nothing has changed.

It is a text based forum. Get used to it.

Look up the word chronology.