Top-posting shenanigans (was: Re: ASR33 $1000+ And Counting...)

From: Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk_at_yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Thu Feb 24 13:29:08 2005

On Thu, 2005-02-24 at 12:49 -0600, David H. Barr wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 13:36:38 -0500, dvcorbin_at_optonline.net

> The REAL One and Only Way is, of course, interleaved posting. I mean
> you paste in the original statement or question, respond to that, then
> paste in the next bit. Of course that takes TIME....

That's just a specialised form of bottom-posting though :-)

IME *typically* the people who top-post come from an environment where
they've only ever used Outlook as their email client. I'm not sure why
that link exists, but it's been my observation.

Everyone's entitled to do their own thing, of course. Personally I find
messages that have been top-posted bloody annoying to read as there's no
context beforehand without first starting at the bottom of the message
(which doesn't seem very logical), and of course it goes really pear-
shaped when people start mixing styles in a thread :(

Correct-posting arguments seem a lot more common than they used to be
though. I do remember the odd top-poster in usenet and mailing lists ten
years ago but it was a very rare occurence.

Wonder if anyone's ever written a philosophy paper about it? :)

cheers

Jules
Received on Thu Feb 24 2005 - 13:29:08 GMT