Your outburst below seems to be self-referential
in terms of bad manners.

There is no association with manners in the free and
personal choice of whether to post at the top or at the bottom,
it's just that - a free choice.

There is nothing that it impolite in exercising a free choice as to
style of presentation - if you think that there is - then you condemn
yourself by being impolite to those of us who are top-posters.

That you choose to target those whose choice is not your own
would seem to suggest that if anybody be the habitué of bad manners,
then it is you.

There are no rules on the matter.

Your post below is a shining example of why top-posting is the
better and preferred option, for, in order to read what you put,
a page down was necessary. Another example of bad manners
from you, in fact, because you inconvenience those who just sit
on the "next" button to thumb through a NG.

"Clarence_A" wrote in message
om...
"Airy R.Bean" wrote in message
...
It's not just my opinion, it's the blatant truth that you get to
see the new content without having to page down
through loads of already-seen quotations.
"Tony VE6MVP" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:27:08 -0000, "Airy R.Bean"

wrote:
The posting misquoted me as a bottom poster.
Ahh.
Top-posting is the preferred option - you get to
see the new content without having to page down
through loads of already-seen quotations.
That's your opinion. Not mine.
Bad manners are no excuse! Learn to be polite and follow the
rules!

"Airy R.Bean" wrote in message
...

snipped BS
"Clarence_A" wrote in message
om...
"Airy R.Bean" wrote in message
...

snipped BS
"Tony VE6MVP" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:27:08 -0000, "Airy R.Bean"

wrote:
The posting misquoted me as a bottom poster.
Ahh.
Top-posting is the preferred option - you get to
see the new content without having to page down
through loads of already-seen quotations.
That's your opinion. Not mine.

Bad manners are no excuse! Learn to be polite and follow the
rules!





Another bad mannered top poster made his insensitive obvious and
ignore good advice so attempt to prove his defective preference
for breaking rules and being a general pain!

What do you need to teach manners? I see your mother failed!
Also you are not even trying!

There are rules by convention. But you choose to ignore them.

Since we are all free to exercise one option. Finding a poster
where there is
no intelligence conveyed! PLONK!

BYE

For someone who is shouting the odds about
bad manners, your outburst below really takes
the biscuit. It is the most hypocritical of rudeness.

Conventions are not rules - if they were to be so, then
everyone, including you, would follow the convention
of top-posting.

As to your rather silly and infantile outburst below....

Firstly, it is random nonsense and complies with none
of the conventions (or, in your own logic, rules) of written
English - hypocrisy once again from you, it would seem.

Secondly, grow up, Clarence!

Stupid boy.

"Clarence_A" wrote in message
...
"Clarence_A" wrote in message
Bad manners are no excuse! Learn to be polite and follow the
rules!
Another bad mannered top poster made his insensitive obvious and
ignore good advice so attempt to prove his defective preference
for breaking rules and being a general pain!
What do you need to teach manners? I see your mother failed!
Also you are not even trying!
There are rules by convention. But you choose to ignore them.
Since we are all free to exercise one option. Finding a poster
where there is
no intelligence conveyed! PLONK!

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:23:02 +0000, Airy R.Bean wrote:
Conventions are not rules - if they were to be so, then everyone,
including you, would follow the convention of top-posting.

RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html

- If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
enough text of the original to give a context. This will make
sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a
response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context
helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!

It's just a guide - the rest of it is worth reading too....

- Mike

In article ,
mike wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:23:02 +0000, Airy R.Bean wrote:
Conventions are not rules - if they were to be so, then everyone,
including you, would follow the convention of top-posting.

RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html

- If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
enough text of the original to give a context. This will make
sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a
response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context
helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!

It's just a guide - the rest of it is worth reading too....

That's correct.

The convention on USENET, and on ARPANET mailing lists such as
"info-mac" (the first I ever read), has long been one of "quote the
material you are responding to, and put your response after it".
That's been the case since at least 1980, and I believe that it dates
back even further than that - probably to the first Unix email systems
and likely back to the days of email on PDP-11s and
TOPS-10/TOPS-20/TENEX systems. In other words, it's a deeply rooted
Internet tradition.

I believe this tradition is probably derived from older written-English
traditions, such as the "letters to the editor" tradition in which a
writer's letter would be printed in whole or part, and an editor's
responses to the points made therein being printed after, or
interspersed with the letter. I've never seen an editor's rejoinders
printed *before* the letter writer's text.

Footnotes and other clarifying comments inserted by a book's editor
are likewise printed beneath the text to which they refer.

On the Internet, the use of "top posting" is a much more recent
phenomenon. It seems to date to the first arrival of Internet-capable
email software authored by Microsoft, a company whom many seem to feel
takes delight in ignoring prevailing standards.

One might say that the Internet's "gentleman's tradition" (no
disrespect to the ladies being intended by the use of that phrase) is
one of interspersed or "bottom" posting, and that those who understand
the Internet technical culture and who value "gentlemanly" behavior
would choose to respect that tradition.

In an absolute sense, one can argue that neither top nor bottom
posting is inherently superior. Howeve, bottom/interspersed posting
"got here first" and has been part of Internet tradition for longer
than there has been an Internet (big "I").

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

The style in which one posts has nothing to do
with gentlemanliness.

"Dave Platt" wrote in message
...
One might say that the Internet's "gentleman's tradition" (no
disrespect to the ladies being intended by the use of that phrase) is
one of interspersed or "bottom" posting, and that those who understand
the Internet technical culture and who value "gentlemanly" behavior
would choose to respect that tradition.

"Airy R.Bean" wrote in message
...
The style in which one posts has nothing to do
with gentlemanliness.

"Dave Platt" wrote in message
...
One might say that the Internet's "gentleman's tradition" (no
disrespect to the ladies being intended by the use of that
phrase) is
one of interspersed or "bottom" posting, and that those who
understand
the Internet technical culture and who value "gentlemanly"
behavior
would choose to respect that tradition.



Obviously the man is unaware of what a gentleman is!

Plonk!

The comma in "top of the message, or include just" shows that
two suggestions are being made, one suggestion is
bottom-posting and the other suggestion is not.

As you say, "It's just a guide" - not rules, but just a guide.

I see that you conveniently forgot to quote the author's
comments that the quoted bit below was just his own
personal preference and not a rule.

"mike" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:23:02 +0000, Airy R.Bean wrote:
Conventions are not rules - if they were to be so, then everyone,
including you, would follow the convention of top-posting.
RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines

- If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
enough text of the original to give a context. This will make
sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a
response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context
helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!
It's just a guide - the rest of it is worth reading too....