If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Top Posting, And Posting: Sort Of Like Waxing
I just learned that I am a "Top Poster". Most of us here are. It's
considered bad net-etiquette to post on top of what the last or another poster wrote. Did you know that? I didn't, and despite what I've read about top posting it makes sense to top post. It's easier to follow from poster to poster when top posting is used. Perhaps within a single post top posting can be troublesome as the reader has to scroll down. I'm mostly interested in what the last person said, not the prior person. At work I've argued for, and implemented putting the most recent record on top of earlier records. I've just reviewed some posts here. Some posters don't even include the post they are responding to. Who cares? It still works. I find that most of the Euro-posters avoid top posting but instead snip the irrelevant parts of the post they are responding to and then insert their thoughts after a quoted section of an earlier poster. This is considered "proper". I do that only when I am "conversing" or responding line by line. Could it be that we are a small group and developed a short hand way to communicate? Like among good friends or in a marriage some of the formality is discarded as unnecessary and inefficient. It's ok because of the "closeness" with the person. Or maybe not. Maybe I've just been a clod. But then so are you probably. Maybe we're like "jazz posters". Feel free to post on top of this, and don't feel the need to snip and quote, but please help me understand why I was told not to top post in RBT. Maybe because it's a bicycle group and there hasn't been a fight in a day or so? (Actually I was told in a kind way off the NG) Do you remove a hard wax when you need to put a softer wax over it? No- only if it the wax will be too thick, or if there is some other good reason to remove it. Do you put a hard wax over a soft wax? Not normally, and only if there is a specific reason to. Are we losing contributors because of our bad manners? Gary Jacobson Rosendale, NY |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Top Posting, And Posting: Sort Of Like Waxing
Fight the urge$%#^^^^^ No, ack, hands doing what they want... (or
similar Dilbertisms) Guilty as charged. And I totally agree - snip and intersperse is appropriate and 'nice' if dissecting a message, but a pain in the butt if you are changing the thought or responding in total. Several of us harken back to the days of true net.news and being frugal with typing because it all was sent over a 1200baud serial link.(remember baud? back before everyone had some sort of high speed connection direct to the internet) Bottom line - I'll do what seems to be most readable and helps me get my point across best (and friendliest if possible). Marsh Jones Gary Jacobson wrote: I just learned that I am a "Top Poster". Most of us here are. It's considered bad net-etiquette to post on top of what the last or another poster wrote. Did you know that? I didn't, and despite what I've read about top posting it makes sense to top post. It's easier to follow from poster to poster when top posting is used. Perhaps within a single post top posting can be troublesome as the reader has to scroll down. I'm mostly interested in what the last person said, not the prior person. At work I've argued for, and implemented putting the most recent record on top of earlier records. I've just reviewed some posts here. Some posters don't even include the post they are responding to. Who cares? It still works. I find that most of the Euro-posters avoid top posting but instead snip the irrelevant parts of the post they are responding to and then insert their thoughts after a quoted section of an earlier poster. This is considered "proper". I do that only when I am "conversing" or responding line by line. Could it be that we are a small group and developed a short hand way to communicate? Like among good friends or in a marriage some of the formality is discarded as unnecessary and inefficient. It's ok because of the "closeness" with the person. Or maybe not. Maybe I've just been a clod. But then so are you probably. Maybe we're like "jazz posters". Feel free to post on top of this, and don't feel the need to snip and quote, but please help me understand why I was told not to top post in RBT. Maybe because it's a bicycle group and there hasn't been a fight in a day or so? (Actually I was told in a kind way off the NG) Do you remove a hard wax when you need to put a softer wax over it? No- only if it the wax will be too thick, or if there is some other good reason to remove it. Do you put a hard wax over a soft wax? Not normally, and only if there is a specific reason to. Are we losing contributors because of our bad manners? Gary Jacobson Rosendale, NY |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Top Posting, And Posting: Sort Of Like Waxing
I remember someone having a little spat about his sometime ago but I'm
afraid I read it as just a little power play. I agree with Marsh and Gary, you read the new post first and then scroll back to check out what came before if need be. On 1/5/04 5:35 am, "Marsh Jones" wrote: Fight the urge$%#^^^^^ No, ack, hands doing what they want... (or similar Dilbertisms) Guilty as charged. And I totally agree - snip and intersperse is appropriate and 'nice' if dissecting a message, but a pain in the butt if you are changing the thought or responding in total. Several of us harken back to the days of true net.news and being frugal with typing because it all was sent over a 1200baud serial link.(remember baud? back before everyone had some sort of high speed connection direct to the internet) Bottom line - I'll do what seems to be most readable and helps me get my point across best (and friendliest if possible). Marsh Jones Gary Jacobson wrote: I just learned that I am a "Top Poster". Most of us here are. It's considered bad net-etiquette to post on top of what the last or another poster wrote. Did you know that? I didn't, and despite what I've read about top posting it makes sense to top post. It's easier to follow from poster to poster when top posting is used. Perhaps within a single post top posting can be troublesome as the reader has to scroll down. I'm mostly interested in what the last person said, not the prior person. At work I've argued for, and implemented putting the most recent record on top of earlier records. I've just reviewed some posts here. Some posters don't even include the post they are responding to. Who cares? It still works. I find that most of the Euro-posters avoid top posting but instead snip the irrelevant parts of the post they are responding to and then insert their thoughts after a quoted section of an earlier poster. This is considered "proper". I do that only when I am "conversing" or responding line by line. Could it be that we are a small group and developed a short hand way to communicate? Like among good friends or in a marriage some of the formality is discarded as unnecessary and inefficient. It's ok because of the "closeness" with the person. Or maybe not. Maybe I've just been a clod. But then so are you probably. Maybe we're like "jazz posters". Feel free to post on top of this, and don't feel the need to snip and quote, but please help me understand why I was told not to top post in RBT. Maybe because it's a bicycle group and there hasn't been a fight in a day or so? (Actually I was told in a kind way off the NG) Do you remove a hard wax when you need to put a softer wax over it? No- only if it the wax will be too thick, or if there is some other good reason to remove it. Do you put a hard wax over a soft wax? Not normally, and only if there is a specific reason to. Are we losing contributors because of our bad manners? Gary Jacobson Rosendale, NY |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Top Posting, And Posting: Sort Of Like Waxing
I disagree. If the text of the post to which you are responding is
necessary to the understanding of your reply, it needs to go first. If it is not, it needs to be deleted (this was, of course, of much more importance when most people had slow modem connections - it still is important when there are folks out there with limited space for saving their e-mail). One of the variables here is that many of those rules of ediquitte (which I could never spell correctly) have to do with e-mail corrispondance, rather than net-news posting. Since many of us read the ski posts by e-mail, those rules should be kept in mind. -Ken ************************************************** ********* Kenneth Salzberg Hamline University School of Law (651) 523-2354 1536 Hewitt Ave. Sisu Skier - 50K Club St. Paul, MN 55104 ************************************************** **************** |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Top Posting, And Posting: Sort Of Like Waxing
Then I'll disagree with Ken on this - it's not too hard to scroll down
to see the text being responded to. Sometimes when a poster 'bottom posts', or intersperses comments inside the text being responded to, it can be hard to find, especially when the earlier text is long. The top posting comments are always easy to locate. In general, I think the best way varies with the situation. If the earlier email is short, so that it and the response are all visible on the screen, then it matters little, IMHO. But I've seen a number of posts where the earlier email is several screens long and it's a bit hard to find the reply text. Wouldn't it be nice if there could be a link at the top of the text that would take you right to the relevant point in the text, as we often get in web pages? Not likely to happen tho. The only case I've seen that inspired me to gently (I hope!) chide an individual poster is a frequent poster on another list I follow (iBobs), where his email program does not insert the common '' at the start of each line in the original text. He bottom posts, and it's always a challenge to parse where his comments begin. Erik ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kenneth Salzberg" To: "Multiple recipients of list NORDIC-SKI" Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 6:05 AM Subject: Top Posting, And Posting: Sort Of Like Waxing I disagree. If the text of the post to which you are responding is necessary to the understanding of your reply, it needs to go first. If it is not, it needs to be deleted (this was, of course, of much more importance when most people had slow modem connections - it still is important when there are folks out there with limited space for saving their e-mail). One of the variables here is that many of those rules of ediquitte (which I could never spell correctly) have to do with e-mail corrispondance, rather than net-news posting. Since many of us read the ski posts by e-mail, those rules should be kept in mind. -Ken ************************************************** ********* Kenneth Salzberg Hamline University School of Law (651) 523-2354 1536 Hewitt Ave. Sisu Skier - 50K Club St. Paul, MN 55104 ************************************************** **************** |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Top Posting, And Posting: Sort Of Like Waxing
I guess I misundersetimated my own posting protocal... That line was
an example of how the English language has been trashed and misused for years. I'm sure I butcher just about every one of my posts. Anyway, who cares if you top post, bottom post, intersperse etc. Many rock climbers "top rope" but I don't know if they "top post" when posting on their newsgroup... Not being a rockclimber, I wouldn't know... I'll continue to post any way I want to. If someone has a problem with that, it's their problem, not mine... Jay Tegeder "Keep training, lycra never lies!" JT "Gary Jacobson" wrote in message . .. I just learned that I am a "Top Poster". Most of us here are. It's considered bad net-etiquette to post on top of what the last or another poster wrote. Did you know that? I didn't, and despite what I've read about top posting it makes sense to top post. It's easier to follow from poster to poster when top posting is used. Perhaps within a single post top posting can be troublesome as the reader has to scroll down. I'm mostly interested in what the last person said, not the prior person. At work I've argued for, and implemented putting the most recent record on top of earlier records. I've just reviewed some posts here. Some posters don't even include the post they are responding to. Who cares? It still works. I find that most of the Euro-posters avoid top posting but instead snip the irrelevant parts of the post they are responding to and then insert their thoughts after a quoted section of an earlier poster. This is considered "proper". I do that only when I am "conversing" or responding line by line. Could it be that we are a small group and developed a short hand way to communicate? Like among good friends or in a marriage some of the formality is discarded as unnecessary and inefficient. It's ok because of the "closeness" with the person. Or maybe not. Maybe I've just been a clod. But then so are you probably. Maybe we're like "jazz posters". Feel free to post on top of this, and don't feel the need to snip and quote, but please help me understand why I was told not to top post in RBT. Maybe because it's a bicycle group and there hasn't been a fight in a day or so? (Actually I was told in a kind way off the NG) Do you remove a hard wax when you need to put a softer wax over it? No- only if it the wax will be too thick, or if there is some other good reason to remove it. Do you put a hard wax over a soft wax? Not normally, and only if there is a specific reason to. Are we losing contributors because of our bad manners? Gary Jacobson Rosendale, NY |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Top Posting, And Posting: Sort Of Like Waxing
Part of netiquette is that groups can create their own etiquette. Most
groups I've participated in expect bottom posting. Most expect the post being responded to, or the appropriate portions, to be quoted. Here it's been the writer's perogi. I do what seems appropriate to the flow of the discussion. If someone wants more info, they can backread the thread. It seems to work. Gene Gary Jacobson wrote: I just learned that I am a "Top Poster". Most of us here are. It's considered bad net-etiquette to post on top of what the last or another poster wrote. Did you know that? I didn't, and despite what I've read about top posting it makes sense to top post. It's easier to follow from poster to poster when top posting is used. Perhaps within a single post top posting can be troublesome as the reader has to scroll down. I'm mostly interested in what the last person said, not the prior person. At work I've argued for, and implemented putting the most recent record on top of earlier records. I've just reviewed some posts here. Some posters don't even include the post they are responding to. Who cares? It still works. I find that most of the Euro-posters avoid top posting but instead snip the irrelevant parts of the post they are responding to and then insert their thoughts after a quoted section of an earlier poster. This is considered "proper". I do that only when I am "conversing" or responding line by line. Could it be that we are a small group and developed a short hand way to communicate? Like among good friends or in a marriage some of the formality is discarded as unnecessary and inefficient. It's ok because of the "closeness" with the person. Or maybe not. Maybe I've just been a clod. But then so are you probably. Maybe we're like "jazz posters". Feel free to post on top of this, and don't feel the need to snip and quote, but please help me understand why I was told not to top post in RBT. Maybe because it's a bicycle group and there hasn't been a fight in a day or so? (Actually I was told in a kind way off the NG) Do you remove a hard wax when you need to put a softer wax over it? No- only if it the wax will be too thick, or if there is some other good reason to remove it. Do you put a hard wax over a soft wax? Not normally, and only if there is a specific reason to. Are we losing contributors because of our bad manners? Gary Jacobson Rosendale, NY |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Top Posting, And Posting: Sort Of Like Waxing
I am indifferent to whether people top post, middle post or bottom post.
The preferrable method in my opinion is to use the one that is most applicable to the type of reply being given. If there is a general discussion, I find it easier to read if a new point is top posted. It comes up on my screen, I read it and if I want to know how it relates to prior posts I can scroll down and look. If someone is replying to specific points in a prior post it is often most effective if the entire message is quoted with an indent or and comments are interspaced without the indent or , If some is replying to one specific point in a previous point, I find it most convenient to read if they just quote that one line and then post their comment directly underneath. What I do find inconsiderate are relplies, like this one, where the previous comments are not included at all so it is difficult to know exactly what the person is commenting on. However, this comment does not require knowledge of previous comments to be relevant, so nothing would be accomplished by including a quote except to fill up memory space and increase download time for those with limited, slow or time expensive connections. Nettiquet be damned, let's just do what works best for us. Scott Elliot |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Top Posting, And Posting: Sort Of Like Waxing
I agree with you on top posting somewhere around 100%..
Mike "Gary Jacobson" wrote in message ... I just learned that I am a "Top Poster". Most of us here are. It's considered bad net-etiquette to post on top of what the last or another poster wrote. Did you know that? I didn't, and despite what I've read about top posting it makes sense to top post. It's easier to follow from poster to poster when top posting is used. Perhaps within a single post top posting can be troublesome as the reader has to scroll down. I'm mostly interested in what the last person said, not the prior person. At work I've argued for, and implemented putting the most recent record on top of earlier records. I've just reviewed some posts here. Some posters don't even include the post they are responding to. Who cares? It still works. I find that most of the Euro-posters avoid top posting but instead snip the irrelevant parts of the post they are responding to and then insert their thoughts after a quoted section of an earlier poster. This is considered "proper". I do that only when I am "conversing" or responding line by line. Could it be that we are a small group and developed a short hand way to communicate? Like among good friends or in a marriage some of the formality is discarded as unnecessary and inefficient. It's ok because of the "closeness" with the person. Or maybe not. Maybe I've just been a clod. But then so are you probably. Maybe we're like "jazz posters". Feel free to post on top of this, and don't feel the need to snip and quote, but please help me understand why I was told not to top post in RBT. Maybe because it's a bicycle group and there hasn't been a fight in a day or so? (Actually I was told in a kind way off the NG) Do you remove a hard wax when you need to put a softer wax over it? No- only if it the wax will be too thick, or if there is some other good reason to remove it. Do you put a hard wax over a soft wax? Not normally, and only if there is a specific reason to. Are we losing contributors because of our bad manners? Gary Jacobson Rosendale, NY |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|