"jlrogers±³©" wrote in message news:uNndh.7418 "Maxprop"
wrote in message
nk.net...

"jlrogers±³©" wrote in message
t...
Top post and save the world some time.

Somehow I presumed you were smarter than that. Guess initial impressions
can be deceiving.

Why do most newsreaders , including Microsoft's "Outlook Express" default
to top posting?

You've asked politely, so I'll give you a straight answer.

I don't know why Outlook Express defaults to top-posting, but I can guess.
Most emails are top-posted, so one can assume that when OE was designed, it
followed the email convention since it is an email client as well. OE is a
very old email client / news reader--even MS has come up with better
software in the intervening years. And OE is probably the weakest, least
versatile news reader currently available. I use it because it's simple and
cheap--it came with my bundled software. If I were serious about Usenet I'd
probably invest in one of the better pieces of software, such as Eudora.

As for top-posting or bottom-posting, the old adage "when in Rome . . ."
applies in spades. It is frustrating, not to mention cumbersome, to have to
deal with top-posters when the majority of the regulars in a NG bottom-post.
If everyone top-posted, it would conversely be annoying to have someone
bottom-posting. Almost everyone here bottom-posts. Jon, you, and a few
others persist in top-posting, which makes for absolutely no continuity in
reading long threads *unless* the person who responded to your post cuts and
pastes your post to the bottom, as I did here.

There is no rule governing where you post, just common courtesy.

Max

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...
snipped!

As for top-posting or bottom-posting, the old adage "when in Rome . . ."
applies in spades. It is frustrating, not to mention cumbersome, to have
to
deal with top-posters when the majority of the regulars in a NG
bottom-post.
If everyone top-posted, it would conversely be annoying to have someone
bottom-posting. Almost everyone here bottom-posts. Jon, you, and a few
others persist in top-posting, which makes for absolutely no continuity in
reading long threads *unless* the person who responded to your post cuts
and
pastes your post to the bottom, as I did here.

There is no rule governing where you post, just common courtesy.

Max

Well, is it not discourteous to asume that all your readers have such a
short attention span that they have to re-read everything from way back so
that they can catch up? Also, if they have not been paying attention why
should all those who have been have to suffer screenfuls of unsnipped
history just to help the lazy ones?
If insufficient attention is given to constructive snippage you cannot blame
anyone for top posting. Jonathan Ganz always top posts and although I
frequently disagree with what he says on non-sailing topics I do always look
at what he has to say because it is quick and easy, whereas most of the
unsnipped bottom posters get instantly marked 'ignore conversation'.
It is lazy and inconsiderate to make people scroll down a couple of screens
just to read something like 'I agree' or 'You are an
idiot/gayboy/lubber/sockpuppet/whatever.
End of rant- and hey! it was bottom posted after snippage!.

"Maxprop" wrote
As for top-posting or bottom-posting, the old adage "when in Rome . . ."

Brain-dead conformist!




Edgar wrote:
Well, is it not discourteous to asume that all your readers have such a
short attention span that they have to re-read everything from way back so
that they can catch up?

Right, that's why I generally cut a lot of quoted previous
posts, just enough to get the drift if you haven't followed
the whole thread.



It is lazy and inconsiderate to make people scroll down a couple of screens
just to read something like 'I agree' or 'You are an
idiot/gayboy/lubber/sockpuppet/whatever.

Yep. That's totally lame.

End of rant- and hey! it was bottom posted after snippage!.


As is proper & intelligent.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
"Maxprop" wrote
As for top-posting or bottom-posting, the old adage "when in Rome . . ."

Brain-dead conformist!

I'll bet you drive on the right when in England, eh?

Max

Edgar wrote:
It is lazy and inconsiderate to make people scroll down a couple of screens
just to read something like 'I agree' or 'You are an
idiot/gayboy/lubber/sockpuppet/whatever.
End of rant- and hey! it was bottom posted after snippage!.


I like bottom posting, with all the caveats you have outlined.

I'ts much more important with emails, IMHO, at least at work. There's
very little more annoying than being the 5th person in a chain to get a
piece of electronic mail with heading "Can you look into this?" and then
having to read each persons input, from the bottom up.

Cheers
Marty

It's also good etiquette to change the subject line when you go to a totally different
topic.....

Cheers,
Ellen

SSFGT-ASAP *
Still though, it is an efficient process to assign tasks and communicate
status to a trouble shooter (analyst to you under 40).

*Whoever Sends one, wants you to Sort it out, make Sense of it all, Fix
it, and Get back to him so he can Take credit, ASAP.

--
jlrogers±³©
"Martin Baxter" wrote in message
...
Edgar wrote:
It is lazy and inconsiderate to make people scroll down a couple of
screens
just to read something like 'I agree' or 'You are an
idiot/gayboy/lubber/sockpuppet/whatever.
End of rant- and hey! it was bottom posted after snippage!.


I like bottom posting, with all the caveats you have outlined.

I'ts much more important with emails, IMHO, at least at work. There's
very little more annoying than being the 5th person in a chain to get a
piece of electronic mail with heading "Can you look into this?" and then
having to read each persons input, from the bottom up.

Cheers
Marty

"jlrogers±³©" wrote:

SSFGT-ASAP *
Still though, it is an efficient process to assign tasks and communicate
status to a trouble shooter (analyst to you under 40).

*Whoever Sends one, wants you to Sort it out, make Sense of it all, Fix
it, and Get back to him so he can Take credit, ASAP.

To me reading a top posted message is rather like reading a book in
which the printer has bound the chapters in reverse order. It's do-able,
but a royal PITA.

Cheers
Marty

"Edgar" wrote in message news:VP-dnS5FnqjeQ-v

Well, is it not discourteous to asume that all your readers have such a
short attention span that they have to re-read everything from way back so
that they can catch up? Also, if they have not been paying attention why
should all those who have been have to suffer screenfuls of unsnipped
history just to help the lazy ones?
If insufficient attention is given to constructive snippage you cannot
blame
anyone for top posting. Jonathan Ganz always top posts and although I
frequently disagree with what he says on non-sailing topics I do always
look
at what he has to say because it is quick and easy, whereas most of the
unsnipped bottom posters get instantly marked 'ignore conversation'.

I think you're being disingenuous, Edgar. Many of Jon's posts are
one-liners, providing too little to know to whom he is responding, let alone
to *what* he is responding. I'm betting you frequently jump to the bottom
of the thread when reading his posts to determine those things. And if you
truly ignore the bottom posters, you must be reading Jon's posts and maybe
one or two others, but no one else's.

It is lazy and inconsiderate to make people scroll down a couple of
screens
just to read something like 'I agree' or 'You are an
idiot/gayboy/lubber/sockpuppet/whatever.
End of rant- and hey! it was bottom posted after snippage!.

You are correct in that snip-editing is courteous. So is bottom-posting
when it's the convention in a NG.

Max

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Edgar" wrote in message news:VP-dnS5FnqjeQ-v

Well, is it not discourteous to asume that all your readers have such a
short attention span that they have to re-read everything from way back
so
that they can catch up? Also, if they have not been paying attention why
should all those who have been have to suffer screenfuls of unsnipped
history just to help the lazy ones?
If insufficient attention is given to constructive snippage you cannot
blame
anyone for top posting. Jonathan Ganz always top posts and although I
frequently disagree with what he says on non-sailing topics I do always
look
at what he has to say because it is quick and easy, whereas most of the
unsnipped bottom posters get instantly marked 'ignore conversation'.

Well, not always... especially now that I've tweaked the registry to default
to bottom posting. :-)

I think you're being disingenuous, Edgar. Many of Jon's posts are
one-liners, providing too little to know to whom he is responding, let
alone to *what* he is responding. I'm betting you frequently jump to the
bottom of the thread when reading his posts to determine those things.
And if you truly ignore the bottom posters, you must be reading Jon's
posts and maybe one or two others, but no one else's.

Default is responding to you Max.

It is lazy and inconsiderate to make people scroll down a couple of
screens
just to read something like 'I agree' or 'You are an
idiot/gayboy/lubber/sockpuppet/whatever.
End of rant- and hey! it was bottom posted after snippage!.

You are correct in that snip-editing is courteous. So is bottom-posting
when it's the convention in a NG.

Max


What's the convention here?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com