View Single Post
  #26  
Old July 7th 07, 09:31 AM posted to rec.crafts.textiles.yarn
nickie{D}
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Please could you all Delete part of those LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOGletters

LOL - I'm finding it fascinating how different different newsgroups can
be! The other one I asked about it in is strongly of the opinion that
top-posting is the work of the devil!

Guess as long as I remember which group is which things will work out
just fine. ;-)

nickie

Mirjam Bruck-Cohen wrote:
Thank you JAN ,,,,
you grabbed this from my aching fingers ,,,
mirjam



Getting messages out of order or not getting them at all has never been a
problem for me. So it's a nuisance to have to scroll through many lines of
quoted text which I have already seen to get to the message. Those who have
missed a previous message aren't left in the dark by top-posting because
they can scroll down to see it. It's really not meaningless unless it's a
"void-post" with no quoted text.

--
Jan in MN

"nickie{D}" wrote ...

Hi David,

I was intrigued by this and asked friends on another newsgroup. The best
reason they came up with for the convention of bottom-posting was the
unreliability of usenet in terms of message propogation. It is common to
receive messages out of order, for instance, and then if the message is
top-posted and the message to which it is replying is not there the person
reading it has no context and it becomes meaningless.

There is no corresponding argument where mailing lists are concerned I
guess as they are more consistent (perhaps with the exception of yahoo
which can be a bit sporadic) and good at delivering messages in the
correct order.

nickie


David R. Sky wrote:

Funny how many posts this thread generated!!


[snip]




Ads