The Logic Off Topic list

From: Colin Miller <snoopy@...> 
Date: Wed May 8, 2002 0:24pm 

Subject: Re: [LUG] [GEN] Quoting style  



On Wednesday 08 May 2002 05:15 am, Sascha Franck wrote:
> I just wanted to add that quoting at the bottom is not only against
> anything one might consider to be "common" use on mailing lists (even if
> many people don't seem to know this at all), but as Hendrik Jan allready
> said, it's also against all western reading standards.
> Whenever you read anything, you will read from top to bottom.
> Whenever someone posts a question you will naturally expect the answer to
> follow, not vice versa.

The irony is that all the reasons people list for not top posting, are
the 
reasons I prefer it. I go by western english standards which means I
read 
from top to bottom and the first logical thing for me to read is the
current 
text since the Subject indicated the thread. Maybe I am just different
than 
most people in that I rarely if ever have to read the quotes other than
as a 
quick reference from time to time to see which small part the reply is 
referring to. To me Top posting more adheres to western reading
standards, 
but that is just my own opinion of course. 

If someone asks a question, that question proceeded the reply in the
original 
post, so logically I expec to read the response next, not two copies of
the 
original question. What I personally like:

question:response:referenced question

as opposed to:

question:referenced question :response

Hey, I'm down for whatever is best for the majority, which seems like
bottom 
posting. Just gets so frustrating for me scrolling though quoted text
all the 
time, knowing I only want to see the current reply. As far as laziness
goes, 
since the bottom of the e-mail has to be removed always, laziness is 
definitely never a cause of anyone on this lst top quoting as it
actually 
takes more effort on the writer if anything. And there may be some
standard 
rule written, but I can say having working in the ISP business for a
couple 
years, I have always seen top posting preferred in most news groups (I 
realise this is a subjective point), and not out of ignorance, but out
of 
efficiency. Cheers! :-)

Colin Miller

From: Colin Miller <snoopy@...>
>Just gets so frustrating for me scrolling though quoted text
>all the
>time, knowing I only want to see the current reply.

Then the writer is quoting too much.



>As far as laziness
>goes,
>since the bottom of the e-mail has to be removed always, laziness is
>definitely never a cause of anyone on this lst top quoting as it
>actually
>takes more effort on the writer if anything.

The logic of this statement has utterly escaped me.  The proper form 
is to select the statement you are responding to and put your reply 
under it.  This requires a modicum of effort but only a modicum.  Top 
posting requires no effort at all on the part of the poster but 
places all responsibility of the figuring out what the poster is 
replying to on the reader.  Shoving the task of sorting out your 
thoughts onto the reader rather than simply laying them out clearly 
is pure laziness.



>And there may be some
>standard
>rule written, but I can say having working in the ISP business for a
>couple
>years, I have always seen top posting preferred in most news groups (I
>realise this is a subjective point), and not out of ignorance, but out
>of
>efficiency. Cheers! :-)


What??

Hey you guys are really bored ,right ?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis Gunn" <dennisg@...>
To: <logic-ot@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 11:47 AM                  hey you guy's are
really bored ,right
Subject: Re: [L-OT] Quoting style (redirected)


> From: Colin Miller <snoopy@...>
Hey you guys are really bored ,right ?

Paul wheeler wrote:

>Hey you guys are really bored ,right ?
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Dennis Gunn" <dennisg@...>
>To: <logic-ot@yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 11:47 AM                  hey you guy's are
>really bored ,right
>Subject: Re: [L-OT] Quoting style (redirected)

And then he wrote:

>  > From: Colin Miller <snoopy@...>
>Hey you guys are really bored ,right ?

I wonder why he didn't just write:

>Hey you guys are really bored ,right ?

and leave all the other stuff out.


It's just bizarre to me how such simple thing as editing your post 
and selecting and positioning your quote in a logical manner is such 
rocket science for so many people.

Dennis Gunn wrote:
>  Top posting requires no effort at all on the part of the poster but
> places all responsibility of the figuring out what the poster is
> replying to on the reader.  Shoving the task of sorting out your
> thoughts onto the reader rather than simply laying them out clearly
> is pure laziness.

Agreed! As most members of the list can't possibly get through more than
10% of what is posted, quite often a response message is the first
contact with a thread. This means that they have to scroll down first,
then up to the response. That goes against the western convention, does
it not ?

In fact, the most economical way, to read this list, is to look at a
recent post, and get the gist of the preceding as well as the response.
If you find the subject matter sufficiently enthralling, then you can go
back over the thread to gather whatever other nuggets you may have
missed. But most times you don't need to.

> 
Colin Miller wote: 
>I have always seen top posting preferred in most news groups

 But news-readers show all threads in-line, and maintain nested threads.
So top posting does apply there, because the recipient is also seeing
the earlier posts above. This is an email list, not a news group. 


Top posting hurts my brain to read, nuff said ;-)


Dave Eager