"CW" wrote in message
news:XVGkb.594163$Oz4.583722@rwcrnsc54...
Is that the legendary "circular book" :)

Nope, we have some Japanese books (even those written in English) which
start from the back of the book, and read forward. Most oriental languages
(and therefor, their books) are written right to left, top to bottom.

CW wrote:

Yes they should but often don't. Doesn't matter whether I am skipping over a
little or a lot, I shouldn't have to skip over anything. The days of 9600
baud modems and days between replies are over. Bottom posting is no longer
necessary.

"Jack" wrote in message
...

If people snipped properly, that wouldn't be a problem.

Snipping is a good thing.

Bottom posting helps when threads branch out in different directions, and when people reply to a message that's not recent.

Your memory problems are none of my concern.




"Jack" wrote in message
...


On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:04:33 -0400, "Mark S. Holden"
wrote:

snip

"Jack" wrote in message
...

If people snipped properly, that wouldn't be a problem.

Snipping is a good thing.

Bottom posting helps when threads branch out in different directions,
and when people reply to a message that's not recent.

Definitely. Many people come into the thread or its derivatives late,
and don't have access to the older posts in the thread. Things get
really confused in any system where the effect precedes its cause.
Especially in complex systems like ongoing multiple-direction threads.

Hate to say it but I get as lazy as the top-posters when dealing with
top posts to a long thread. I skip over any one-line top-posted reply
that I have to page down several pages to understand what they're
replying about. All they want to do is save themselves some work at
cost to the subsequent readers.

IMNSHO. JMTC. YMMV. PSHWOTR. and other classic Usenet acronyms).

"David" wrote in message
...
www.forteinc.com

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 20:18:33 GMT, Gregg wrote:

Use a real newsreader, Like Forte Free Agent :-p


What? And break Bill's heart?

Slight cruel streak, eh?