"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"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?

Not sure exactly, but I respond to more bottom posters than top posters.
Whether they top or bottom post has nothing to do with whether I respond,
but it seems I respond to more bottom posters than top. You are the prime
exception.

Max