Top posting vs. bottom posting
Robbie and Laura Reynolds
> >There is nothing worse than following a bottom posted thread only to find
> >that the next reply has been top posted and of course vice versa for a top
> >posted thread.
I thought it was pretty bad when my tonsils were so swollen that I
couldn't swallow and I could hardly breathe, but now that I think about
it you're right. That wasn't half as bad as a top posted reply after a
bottom posting precedent. Even the vasectomy wasn't so bad, come to
think of it.
Paul McIntosh
"Robbie and Laura Reynolds" <rob...@kcxnet.com> wrote in message
news:4037A92D...@kcxnet.com...
Beav
"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
news:6ive30d27h6ij43d4...@4ax.com...
> In article <c12uqr$1dhemt$1...@ID-47909.news.uni-berlin.de>, Roger Demming
> <spa...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
> >I know that there are no hard and fast rules on this newsgroup regarding
> >top and bottom posting, but please, when replying to a post that has
> >already had a reply can the respondee follow the protocol that has been
> >established for that thread.
>
> oh, but you are wrong about there being no rules. usenet netiquette is
> to follow the usenet convention.
On top of that, there's that ridiculous habit of mass cross-posting
--
Beav
Please note my E-mail address is "beavis dot original at ntlworld dot com"
(with the obvious changes)
Beavisland now lives at
www.beavisoriginal.co.uk
Greg Forestieri
It appears as though you missed at least 3 newsgroups. Please work on
your cross-posting skills. 8^|
Greg
Philip Martin
"Beav" <beavis....@ntloxoworld.com> wrote in message
news:103ibsi...@news.supernews.com...
>
> "teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
> news:6ive30d27h6ij43d4...@4ax.com...
> > In article <c12uqr$1dhemt$1...@ID-47909.news.uni-berlin.de>, Roger Demming
> > <spa...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> >
> > >I know that there are no hard and fast rules on this newsgroup
regarding
> > >top and bottom posting, but please, when replying to a post that has
> > >already had a reply can the respondee follow the protocol that has been
> > >established for that thread.
> >
> > oh, but you are wrong about there being no rules. usenet netiquette is
> > to follow the usenet convention.
>
> On top of that, there's that ridiculous habit of mass cross-posting
>
>
Then there's 'middle' posting and posting ontop of the bottom or at the
bottom of the top. It all gets bloody confusing;o))
Phil Martin.
Don Stauffer
The times when I really appreciate top posting is when it is a long
thread and people do not trim earlier messages in thread (and long sigs
of umpteen posters). I hate to wade through all that to find a few
words of new comment.
--
Don Stauffer in Minnesota
stau...@usfamily.net
webpage- http://www.usfamily.net/web/stauffer
Beav
"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
> In article <c18js1$hhc$1...@sparta.btinternet.com>, "Paul McIntosh"> keep top psoting and I`ll make sure you`re a eunuch
What're you going to do? Reach through the monitor screen and rip his
bollocks off?
Strikes me you're a bit of a coward writing cheques with your mouth that you
can't cash with your fists.
Beav
"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
> In article <103qdas...@news.supernews.com>, "Beav"
> <beavis....@ntloxoworld.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
> >news:urnm30p39ddfi70sq...@4ax.com...
> >> In article <c18js1$hhc$1...@sparta.btinternet.com>, "Paul McIntosh"
> >> <pa...@mcintoshcentral.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Yea, and I thought kidney stones were bad!
> >>
> >> keep top psoting and I`ll make sure you`re a eunuch
> >
> >What're you going to do? Reach through the monitor screen and rip his
> >bollocks off?
> >
> >Strikes me you're a bit of a coward writing cheques with your mouth that
you
> >can't cash with your fists.
>
> you are foreigners
I do believe you've got that arse backwards.
Carl Farrington
Definitions:
Top-posting: Writing the message above the original text, when one replies
to an email or a post in a newsgroup.
Bottom-posting: The opposite of top-posting. Now the new message is placed
below the original text.
We are fanatic Usenet-readers. As a result we are often annoyed by people
who keep top-posting. This is considered as not good 'Net etiquette'. The
majority of Usenet-users prefer bottom-posting.
In addition to bottom-posting, it is customary to leave out non-relevant
parts of the message with regard to the reply, and to put the reply directly
beneath the quoted relevant parts. If you want to know more about writing
new posts. Check out this site:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/documents/quotingguide.html
Below you can find our arguments why bottom-posting is better than
top-posting.
1.. Because it is proper Usenet Etiquette. Check out the following URL:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html . It is a little outdated but still
has a lot of valid points. Let us quote something from this site:
If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough
text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers
understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially,
is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is
possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving
context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!
2.. We use a good news reader like Forte Agent. Good newsreaders like
Agent put the signature by default at the end of the post, which is the
Usenet convention. Microsoft Outlook Express however has some serious bugs.
Let us quote someone we know:
"The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day
they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
We are programmers ourselves, and we know it is very easy to implement to
put a signature at the end of the post instead of putting it directly above
the post you are replying to and can not change the position. Forte Agent
has as a feature that reply to a post it will remove the signature
(recognizable by '-- ', note the extra space) and everything below it, so it
will remove a part of the original message. This is good Usenet practice so
Agent is not faulty. Outlook Express on the other hand is faulty, check this
bugreport regarding the Usenet signature delimiter.
If you want to try Agent, you can get it here.
3.. Top-posting makes posts incomprehensible. Firstly: In normal
conversations, one does not answer to something that has not yet been said.
So it is unclear to reply to the top, whilst the original message is at the
bottom. Secondly: In western society a book is normally read from top to
bottom. Top-posting forces one to stray from this convention: Reading some
at the top, skipping to the bottom to read the question, and going back to
the top to continue. This annoyance increases even more than linear with the
number of top-posts in the message. If someone replies to a thread and you
forgot what the thread was all about, or that thread was incomplete for some
reasons, it will be quite tiresome to rapidly understand what the thread was
all about, due to bad posting and irrelevant text which has not been
removed.
4.. To prevent hideously long posts with a minimal account of new text, it
is good Usenet practice to remove the non-relevant parts and optionally
summarize the relevant parts of the original post, with regard to one's
reply. Top-posting inevitably leads to long posts, because most top-posters
leave the original message intact. All these long posts not only clutter up
discussions, but they also clutter up the server space.
5.. Top-posting makes it hard for bottom-posters to reply to the relevant
parts: it not possible to answer within the original message. Bottom-posting
does not make top-posting any harder.
6.. Some people will argue that quoting looks bad due line wrapping. This
can simply be dealt with by dropping Outlook Express as a start, and using
only linewidths of 65 - 70 characters. Otherwise one has do it manually, and
that can be tiresome.
7.. A reason given by stubborn top-posters: they don't like to scroll to
read the new message. We like to disagree here, because we always have to
scroll down to see the original message and after that to scroll back up,
just to see to what they are replying to. As a result you have to scroll
twice as much when reading a top-poster's message. As a counterargument they
say (believe us they do): "You can check the previous message in the
discussion". This is even more tiresome than scrolling and with the
unreliable nature of Usenet (and even email is inevitably unreliable), the
previous message in the discussion can be simply unavailable.
8.. Some newsgroups have strict conventions concerning posting in their
charter. As an example we can tell you that in most Dutch newsgroups, you
will be warned, killfiled or maybe even flamed, if you fail to follow Usenet
conventions or if you do not quote according to the quoting guidelines. In
general: it is better to practice the guidelines, if one does not want to
get flamed in a newsgroup one just subscribed to.
We can conclude that there are no good reasons we know of for top-posting.
The most top-posts originate from the minimal work people spend on making
posts. We think that one should be proud of one's post, that is it contains
relevant content, well-formed sentences and no irrelevant 'bullsh*t', before
uploading to your newsserver. If the majority of the group will adhere to
this convention, the group will be nicer, tidier and easier to read.
As a final remark we want to bring non-quoting into mind. This means that
the original content of an email or Usenet post is completely removed. It
makes it very hard for a reader to find out to what and whom one is
replying. This phenomenon can be partly attributed to wrong settings of
news- and email-clients, and partly to people who want to start with clean
replies.
Carl Farrington
> In article <c1qi4h$g20$1$8302...@news.demon.co.uk>, "Carl Farrington"
> <ca...@000compsup000.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I always found this reasonable...
>>
>> top-posting.
>>
>> 1.. Because it is proper Usenet Etiquette. Check out the following
>> URL: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html . It is a little outdated
>> but still has a lot of valid points. Let us quote something from
>> this site:
[snip]
>
> thanks, finally someone who posts what usenet protocol is.
You might've snipped the post though ;)
W4JLE
you pioneers did in the old days.
If top posting gets your panties in a wad, start a moderated group complete
with posting Nazi's and be done with it.
Teach my outlook express to bottom post and I might consider it. Otherwise,
I start typing where Microsoft set my cursor.
How that for "Netiquette"...
"Carl Farrington" <ca...@000compsup000.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:c1qi4h$g20$1$8302...@news.demon.co.uk...
Beav
"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
> In article <c1qi4h$g20$1$8302...@news.demon.co.uk>, "Carl Farrington"
> <ca...@000compsup000.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >In addition to bottom-posting, it is customary to leave out non-relevant
> >parts of the message with regard to the reply, and to put the reply
directly
> >beneath the quoted relevant parts. If you want to know more about writing
> >new posts. Check out this site:
> >http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/documents/quotingguide.html
>
> thanks, finally someone who posts what usenet protocol is.
Bit in the time honoured manner expected of a total knobhead like you, you
obviously only read the parts that suited you.
Trim the fucking posts yu spaz!!!
Paul McIntosh
"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
news:urnm30p39ddfi70sq...@4ax.com...
> In article <c18js1$hhc$1...@sparta.btinternet.com>, "Paul McIntosh"
> <pa...@mcintoshcentral.com> wrote:
>
> >Yea, and I thought kidney stones were bad!
>
> keep top psoting and I`ll make sure you`re a eunuch
>
Paul McIntosh
"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
news:1gj640l6cjjhj3a0h...@4ax.com...
> In article <1043k30...@news.supernews.com>, "Beav"
> <beavis....@ntloxoworld.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
> >news:0p6240ld64ib6td2r...@4ax.com...
> >> In article <c1qi4h$g20$1$8302...@news.demon.co.uk>, "Carl Farrington"
> >> <ca...@000compsup000.net.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >
> >> >In addition to bottom-posting, it is customary to leave out
non-relevant
> >> >parts of the message with regard to the reply, and to put the reply
> >directly
> >> >beneath the quoted relevant parts. If you want to know more about
writing
> >> >new posts. Check out this site:
> >> >http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/documents/quotingguide.html
> >>
> >> thanks, finally someone who posts what usenet protocol is.
> >
> >Bit in the time honoured manner expected of a total knobhead like you,
you
> >obviously only read the parts that suited you.
> >
> >Trim the fucking posts yu spaz!!!
>
> -buy- a piece of software ya` ignorant bitch
>
>
e
>
>In article <c208er$kjq$1...@sparta.btinternet.com>, "Paul McIntosh">yours
>
alt.retard.braindead.useless.garbage
send all it's posts to ab...@usenetserver.com
Beav
"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
> In article <1043k30...@news.supernews.com>, "Beav"
> <beavis....@ntloxoworld.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >news:0p6240ld64ib6td2r...@4ax.com...
> >> In article <c1qi4h$g20$1$8302...@news.demon.co.uk>, "Carl Farrington"
> >> <ca...@000compsup000.net.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >
> >> >In addition to bottom-posting, it is customary to leave out
non-relevant
> >> >parts of the message with regard to the reply, and to put the reply
> >directly
> >> >beneath the quoted relevant parts. If you want to know more about
writing
> >> >new posts. Check out this site:
> >> >http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/documents/quotingguide.html
> >>
> >> thanks, finally someone who posts what usenet protocol is.
> >
> >Bit in the time honoured manner expected of a total knobhead like you,
you
> >obviously only read the parts that suited you.
> >
> >Trim the fucking posts yu spaz!!!
>
And how would my buying a piece of software help YOU trim your posts you
dumbass fuck?
Beav
"Paul McIntosh" <pa...@mcintoshcentral.com> wrote in message
news:c208er$kjq$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...
> Which news group are you posting from?
I think it's the crafts.scrapbook group Paul he certainly isn't a modeller.
(Not got the intelligence)
Beav
"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
> In article <c1s39v$3po6$1...@news3.infoave.net>, "W4JLE" <w4jle(remove to
> reply)@pbtcomm.net> wrote:
>
> >Get over it, the times they are a changing. We really don't give a flip
what
> >you pioneers did in the old days.
> >
> >If top posting gets your panties in a wad, start a moderated group
complete
> >with posting Nazi's and be done with it.
> >
> >Teach my outlook express to bottom post and I might consider it.
Otherwise,
> >I start typing where Microsoft set my cursor.
>
This coming from someone who uses "news.uni-berlin.de"... free to anyone
with no money
What a fucking joke you are boy.
e
powerless in real life and have no ability to comprehend
simple concepts.
most states have free counseling, everyone here will write a
reccomendation you be helped. it's sad an pathetic that some
dull boob has nothing of value for the world.
get help or kill yourself.
W4JLE
"teh insane Gaymer" <gay...@warhammer.mini> wrote in message
news:88j640pdcte74o7ud...@4ax.com...
> In article <c1s39v$3po6$1...@news3.infoave.net>, "W4JLE" <w4jle(remove to
> reply)@pbtcomm.net> wrote:
>
> >Get over it, the times they are a changing. We really don't give a flip
what
> >you pioneers did in the old days.
> >
> >If top posting gets your panties in a wad, start a moderated group
complete
> >with posting Nazi's and be done with it.
> >
> >Teach my outlook express to bottom post and I might consider it.
Otherwise,
> >I start typing where Microsoft set my cursor.
>
> then -buy- a newsreader and not free email software ya` cheap bastard
> --
W4JLE
German newsgroup, but that sure sn't where it orginated.
"Beav" <beavis....@ntloxoworld.com> wrote in message
news:1047s8b...@news.supernews.com...
DN
I am vastly obliged (Oz = thanks mate) for your post. Very informative.
DN
"Carl Farrington" <ca...@000compsup000.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:c1qi4h$g20$1$8302...@news.demon.co.uk...