41 said:A Muzi said:M Santos said:In the interest of respecting the good folks of this NG, I'll try
to remember not to top post, but please tell me-- What's the big
deal? Who made this silly rule, and what stick was lodged up his
or her backside when he or she came up with it? Just curious
This "silly rule" has been in place for nearly 20 years, and was
developed by consensus as being the style that made the most sense for
newsgroups. IMHO it makes the most sense for e-mail, too. The
reason is to write a logical, coherent statement which is easy to read
and gets your point across effectively. This is a plus for the writer
(a.k.a., you). By following quoted text with response, there is no
ambiguity as to what relates to what in the discussion.
I realize that many people are new to this type of discussion and that
many people's educations did not include the development of good
writing skills, thanks to the preoccupation with teaching what will be
on the national standardized exams rather than teaching for mastery of
the material. I disagree with those who think that people shouldn't
have to learn to express themselves effectively and that not top
posting is too onerous, as those skills will stand them in good stead
in many aspects of life. After all, you don't want to be top posting
on the boss's departmental memos.
Try Googling for "top posting" and you'll find lots of good
information on the topic, including the whys and wherefores.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:the general consensus is that a thread is more readable with
the older comments first followed by the reply/response.
If the material to be quoted is brief, bottom posting is better.
If the material to be quoted is endless, as is so often the case here,
PLEASE TOP POST.
Better yet, TRIM THE CRUFT OUT OF POSTS. There is rarely if ever a
need to quote the entire thread in any one post. Just quote the
material to which you are responding. All too often both top and
bottom posters will quote 500 lines of text to add "me too."
