Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old July 24th 05, 03:06 PM
Polymath
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.

"Ham op" wrote in message
...
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.

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



  #2   Report Post  
Old July 24th 05, 06:41 PM
John Smith
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Polymath:

Yep, unless you have all day to start paging though past commented
texts of posts--top posting is where it is at!!!

Some people have been sold the line that there is something leet about
bottom posting--obviously they haven't a clue... but even think they
fool others!

Only reason you should have a problem these days, is if you are still
using telnet to read your news and email!

John

"Polymath" wrote in message
...
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.

"Ham op" wrote in message
...
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.

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





  #3   Report Post  
Old July 24th 05, 11:28 PM
NunYa Bidness
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:09 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:

Some people have been sold the line that there is something leet about
bottom posting--obviously they haven't a clue... but even think they
fool others!


Your an utter idiot.
  #4   Report Post  
Old July 25th 05, 01:04 AM
Ham op
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.

NunYa Bidness wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:09 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:


Some people have been sold the line that there is something leet about
bottom posting--obviously they haven't a clue... but even think they
fool others!



Your an utter idiot.


  #5   Report Post  
Old July 25th 05, 05:56 AM
NunYa Bidness
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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. 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.


  #6   Report Post  
Old July 29th 05, 10:20 PM
Polymath
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What a well-reasoned argument in favour of top-posting!

"NunYa Bidness" wrote in message
...
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.



  #7   Report Post  
Old July 30th 05, 05:37 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.


  #9   Report Post  
Old July 29th 05, 10:19 PM
Polymath
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Right on!

"Ham op" wrote in message
news
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.

NunYa Bidness wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:09 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:


Some people have been sold the line that there is something leet about
bottom posting--obviously they haven't a clue... but even think they fool
others!



Your an utter idiot.




  #10   Report Post  
Old July 31st 05, 01:04 AM
Radio Active
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:28:09 GMT, NunYa Bidness wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:09 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:

Some people have been sold the line that there is something leet about
bottom posting--obviously they haven't a clue... but even think they
fool others!


Your an utter idiot.


His utter idiot what?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017