|
|
 FAQ
 Search
 Memberlist
 Usergroups
 Register
 Profile
 Private messages
 Log in
|
|
| Author |
Message |
why
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2003 1:06 am Post subject: please make the reply shoter ;) |
 |
|
hi,
it is common in this forum that
if someone reply any previous
post the new post still contain
the massage (>) of the previous post.
it make the thread long... er .
it is unnecessary .
so plz plz do not include the
words of the previous post
unless it is necessary .
take care . |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
JasonW
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2003 2:04 am Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
Get used to it, it is the way people keep track of what the thread is about
if they missed the previous posts. However, it is nice to snip out
irrelevant info when the thread gets really long.
-JasonW
"why" <m004202002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:755f39b8.0307311206.fa3e689@posting.google.com...
| Quote: | hi,
it is common in this forum that
if someone reply any previous
post the new post still contain
the massage (>) of the previous post.
it make the thread long... er .
it is unnecessary .
so plz plz do not include the
words of the previous post
unless it is necessary .
take care . |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
inf1n1ty
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:23 am Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
While we are on the subject, why do some people reply at the bottom of a
post and others at the top? I personally find this a pet peeve of mine. In
a long thread, it gets to be a pain in the butt to keep scrolling to the
bottom of some, but not others.
In regard to the original post, replier preference in my opinion.
--
inf1n1ty
"why" <m004202002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:755f39b8.0307311206.fa3e689@posting.google.com...
| Quote: | hi,
it is common in this forum that
if someone reply any previous
post the new post still contain
the massage (>) of the previous post.
it make the thread long... er .
it is unnecessary .
so plz plz do not include the
words of the previous post
unless it is necessary .
take care . |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
newsreader
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:25 am Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
oh no, not the top vs. bottom thread again! :-)
"inf1n1ty" <inf1n1ty@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:GygWa.1296$tf.917@lakeread03...
| Quote: | While we are on the subject, why do some people reply at the bottom of a
post and others at the top? I personally find this a pet peeve of mine.
In
a long thread, it gets to be a pain in the butt to keep scrolling to the
bottom of some, but not others.
In regard to the original post, replier preference in my opinion.
--
inf1n1ty
"why" <m004202002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:755f39b8.0307311206.fa3e689@posting.google.com...
hi,
it is common in this forum that
if someone reply any previous
post the new post still contain
the massage (>) of the previous post.
it make the thread long... er .
it is unnecessary .
so plz plz do not include the
words of the previous post
unless it is necessary .
take care .
|
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/24/2003 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
inf1n1ty
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:39 am Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
sorry, didn't mean to dredge up bad memories...:D
--
inf1n1ty
"newsreader" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:3HgWa.22654$Vt6.10533@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
| Quote: | oh no, not the top vs. bottom thread again! :-)
"inf1n1ty" <inf1n1ty@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:GygWa.1296$tf.917@lakeread03...
While we are on the subject, why do some people reply at the bottom of a
post and others at the top? I personally find this a pet peeve of mine.
In
a long thread, it gets to be a pain in the butt to keep scrolling to the
bottom of some, but not others.
In regard to the original post, replier preference in my opinion.
--
inf1n1ty
"why" <m004202002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:755f39b8.0307311206.fa3e689@posting.google.com...
hi,
it is common in this forum that
if someone reply any previous
post the new post still contain
the massage (>) of the previous post.
it make the thread long... er .
it is unnecessary .
so plz plz do not include the
words of the previous post
unless it is necessary .
take care .
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/24/2003
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lisa Duchovny
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2003 9:34 am Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
Hi,
Although it makes the thread long and boring, it is essential for
maintaining its continuity. So, I think it is necessary. What one can
do is read through the links by clicking them. That does save time and
makes the process fine.
"inf1n1ty" <inf1n1ty@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<LNgWa.1299$tf.662@lakeread03>...
| Quote: | sorry, didn't mean to dredge up bad memories...:D
--
inf1n1ty
"newsreader" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:3HgWa.22654$Vt6.10533@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
oh no, not the top vs. bottom thread again! :-)
"inf1n1ty" <inf1n1ty@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:GygWa.1296$tf.917@lakeread03...
While we are on the subject, why do some people reply at the bottom of a
post and others at the top? I personally find this a pet peeve of mine.
In
a long thread, it gets to be a pain in the butt to keep scrolling to the
bottom of some, but not others.
In regard to the original post, replier preference in my opinion.
--
inf1n1ty
"why" <m004202002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:755f39b8.0307311206.fa3e689@posting.google.com...
hi,
it is common in this forum that
if someone reply any previous
post the new post still contain
the massage (>) of the previous post.
it make the thread long... er .
it is unnecessary .
so plz plz do not include the
words of the previous post
unless it is necessary .
take care .
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/24/2003
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
why
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2003 8:24 pm Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
see , what you people did .
if you are replying to the previous
post there is no need to add it with your
massage (there is always a exception!).
it makes the thread longer+clumsy
if one read the thread from googly group. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Hansang Bae
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2003 9:40 am Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
In article <GygWa.1296$tf.917@lakeread03>, inf1n1ty@hotmail.com says...
| Quote: | While we are on the subject, why do some people reply at the bottom of a
post and others at the top? I personally find this a pet peeve of mine. In
a long thread, it gets to be a pain in the butt to keep scrolling to the
bottom of some, but not others.
|
Because some of us have been using Usenet before Outlook Express became
popular.
Bottom posting was considered "proper" etiquette for quite some time.
But Bernie had a good point. Short and sweet replies at the top,
technical discussions at the bottom - to make it easier to follow.
--
hsb
"Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
*************** USE ROT13 TO SEE MY EMAIL ADDRESS ****************
********************************************************************
Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
******************************************************************** |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bernie
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2003 10:12 am Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 04:40:09 GMT, Hansang Bae <uonr@alp.ee.pbz> wrote:
| Quote: | In article <GygWa.1296$tf.917@lakeread03>, inf1n1ty@hotmail.com says...
While we are on the subject, why do some people reply at the bottom of a
post and others at the top? I personally find this a pet peeve of mine. In
a long thread, it gets to be a pain in the butt to keep scrolling to the
bottom of some, but not others.
Because some of us have been using Usenet before Outlook Express became
popular.
|
Right, and some of us delete posts that we have replied to because our
reader allows us to do that. That is exactly why I don't use OE...too
many messages to look at, and my news service keeps about the last 500
posts from this group! It is completely unusable if I can't delete
posts to clear out my view.
| Quote: | Bottom posting was considered "proper" etiquette for quite some time.
But Bernie had a good point. Short and sweet replies at the top,
technical discussions at the bottom - to make it easier to follow.
|
You have the memory of an elephant! I think I may have said something
like that more than 6 months ago, maybe even a year ago.
There is one other time I top post as well. When I have introductory
remarks to make that don't fit within the context of point-by-point
reply, or when I am not directly responding to specific points, like a
change of subject, for example.
In the long run, I just play it by ear and do what I think makes the
most sense given the context.
--Bernie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2003 6:37 pm Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
Bernie, please email me. I have a question.
Thanks.
Rob.
On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 00:12:59 -0500, Bernie <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 04:40:09 GMT, Hansang Bae <uonr@alp.ee.pbz> wrote:
In article <GygWa.1296$tf.917@lakeread03>, inf1n1ty@hotmail.com says...
While we are on the subject, why do some people reply at the bottom of a
post and others at the top? I personally find this a pet peeve of mine. In
a long thread, it gets to be a pain in the butt to keep scrolling to the
bottom of some, but not others.
Because some of us have been using Usenet before Outlook Express became
popular.
Right, and some of us delete posts that we have replied to because our
reader allows us to do that. That is exactly why I don't use OE...too
many messages to look at, and my news service keeps about the last 500
posts from this group! It is completely unusable if I can't delete
posts to clear out my view.
Bottom posting was considered "proper" etiquette for quite some time.
But Bernie had a good point. Short and sweet replies at the top,
technical discussions at the bottom - to make it easier to follow.
You have the memory of an elephant! I think I may have said something
like that more than 6 months ago, maybe even a year ago.
There is one other time I top post as well. When I have introductory
remarks to make that don't fit within the context of point-by-point
reply, or when I am not directly responding to specific points, like a
change of subject, for example.
In the long run, I just play it by ear and do what I think makes the
most sense given the context.
--Bernie |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wayne
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2003 11:38 pm Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
Hansang Bae wrote:
| Quote: | In article <GygWa.1296$tf.917@lakeread03>, inf1n1ty@hotmail.com says...
While we are on the subject, why do some people reply at the bottom of a
post and others at the top? I personally find this a pet peeve of mine. In
a long thread, it gets to be a pain in the butt to keep scrolling to the
bottom of some, but not others.
|
Me too!
| Quote: | Because some of us have been using Usenet before Outlook Express became
popular.
|
What has that to do with it?
| Quote: | Bottom posting was considered "proper" etiquette for quite some time.
But Bernie had a good point. Short and sweet replies at the top,
technical discussions at the bottom - to make it easier to follow.
|
Actually "proper" etiquette was initially to not quote old posts
at all. It was assumed you had access (sooner or later) to the
previous posts in a thread. When the net became less reliable it
became more fashionable to quote old material in case some readers
missed previous posts. The quoted material was often put at the
bottom so if needed a quick scroll down shows the previous post.
Usually folks can guess the question from the subject and reply.
In the 1990s it became fashionable to quote parts of old messages
and reply to just that. However this of course loses context, so
it is best to quote all of a previous article and post above, or
to not quote all of a previous post (and mix in your comments).
Lately a number of bottom-posters have become rabid and violate
all sorts of "netiquette" guidelines in a religious frenzy to
make top-posters "see the light" of bottom posting. Some even
re-post any articles that were top-posted reformatted as
bottom posted!
I don't know how it started but the rumor that top-posting is
a Microsoft plot or a result of OE is false. I have been top-
posting since 1979 back when I worked for AT&T Bell Labs on
Unix boxes only. It was common practice then (when quoting
at all), and this is before MS was a gleam in Bill Gates' eye.
-Wayne (proud top poster but willing to be flexible) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bernie
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2003 12:18 am Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 14:38:28 -0400, Wayne <flames@dev.nul> wrote:
| Quote: | -Wayne (proud top poster but willing to be flexible)
|
LOL. That is probably the best line I have ever seen in all the wars
over posting styles.
--Bernie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ken
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:54 pm Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
I also like to be "On-Top"
"Wayne" <flames@dev.nul> wrote in message news:bgh1gt$5lj$1@news1.usf.edu...
| Quote: | Hansang Bae wrote:
In article <GygWa.1296$tf.917@lakeread03>, inf1n1ty@hotmail.com says...
While we are on the subject, why do some people reply at the bottom of a
post and others at the top? I personally find this a pet peeve of mine.
In
a long thread, it gets to be a pain in the butt to keep scrolling to the
bottom of some, but not others.
Me too!
Because some of us have been using Usenet before Outlook Express became
popular.
What has that to do with it?
Bottom posting was considered "proper" etiquette for quite some time.
But Bernie had a good point. Short and sweet replies at the top,
technical discussions at the bottom - to make it easier to follow.
Actually "proper" etiquette was initially to not quote old posts
at all. It was assumed you had access (sooner or later) to the
previous posts in a thread. When the net became less reliable it
became more fashionable to quote old material in case some readers
missed previous posts. The quoted material was often put at the
bottom so if needed a quick scroll down shows the previous post.
Usually folks can guess the question from the subject and reply.
In the 1990s it became fashionable to quote parts of old messages
and reply to just that. However this of course loses context, so
it is best to quote all of a previous article and post above, or
to not quote all of a previous post (and mix in your comments).
Lately a number of bottom-posters have become rabid and violate
all sorts of "netiquette" guidelines in a religious frenzy to
make top-posters "see the light" of bottom posting. Some even
re-post any articles that were top-posted reformatted as
bottom posted!
I don't know how it started but the rumor that top-posting is
a Microsoft plot or a result of OE is false. I have been top-
posting since 1979 back when I worked for AT&T Bell Labs on
Unix boxes only. It was common practice then (when quoting
at all), and this is before MS was a gleam in Bill Gates' eye.
-Wayne (proud top poster but willing to be flexible)
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hansang Bae
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2003 10:28 am Post subject: Re: please make the reply shoter ;) |
|
|
| Quote: | Hansang Bae wrote:
Because some of us have been using Usenet before Outlook Express became
popular.
|
In article <bgh1gt$5lj$1@news1.usf.edu>, flames@dev.nul says...
| Quote: | What has that to do with it?
|
Outlook Express defaults to top-posting. That is, the "blinking
cursor" sits at the top of the page. Forte, Gravity does not. It even
honors the "-- " convention.
| Quote: | Actually "proper" etiquette was initially to not quote old posts
at all. It was assumed you had access (sooner or later) to the
previous posts in a thread. When the net became less reliable it
became more fashionable to quote old material in case some readers
missed previous posts. The quoted material was often put at the
bottom so if needed a quick scroll down shows the previous post.
Usually folks can guess the question from the subject and reply.
|
I guess I'd have to differ here. Back when Usenet had less than 4000
newsgroups (circa late 80s maybe early 90's...can't really remember),
disk space and resources were expensive. I fought the battle as a news-
admin for my school. And back then, there was no scrolling! OK,
within, X, maybe. I used nn (and loved it) until my last shell account
was revoked. I switched to Gravity and although it took some time
getting used to it, it's not a bad reader for Wintel platform.
[snip]
| Quote: | I don't know how it started but the rumor that top-posting is
a Microsoft plot or a result of OE is false.
|
Only that it *made* it more convenient. No black helicopters involved!
| Quote: | I have been top-
posting since 1979 back when I worked for AT&T Bell Labs on
Unix boxes only. It was common practice then (when quoting
at all), and this is before MS was a gleam in Bill Gates' eye.
|
I can't say that I go back that far so I'll have to take your word for
it! My TRS-80 didn't come with a newsreader! :)
--
hsb
"Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
*************** USE ROT13 TO SEE MY EMAIL ADDRESS ****************
********************************************************************
Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
******************************************************************** |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
