Why don't you both move this trivial ping pong 'conversation' to a newsgroup
on the topic of news groups? You case then chase your own tails to your
hearts content and talk about nothing all day. To read 200 posts you must
either have a huge range of hobbies or be a professional news group reader.
Do either of you actually have a pond? - Don't answer that, we don't want
to know, we are all bored to death.

Stick to ponds, fish, building ponds, etc, not the damn style.

And as for some of the threads I have seen here about damn elections, rape,
and I don't know what!!!! Give us break!

Fireball.


"Derek Broughton" wrote in message
...
Stephen M. Henning wrote:

The majority of Usenet-users prefer bottom-posting. In addition to

afaik, the majority of Usenet users prefer to read _inline_ posting.
Unfortunately, many of them aren't interested in taking the time, either.

Bottom-posting is proper Usenet Etiquette. Check out the following URL:

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html

rfc1855 says _nothing_ about bottom posting. The word "bottom" doesn't
even
appear. Of course, the RFC itself says nothing directly about top posting
either, though it does say "be sure you summarize the original at the top
of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a
context".

The biggest problem with top-, inline- or bottom- posting or is the people
who insist on changing the style in the middle of a thread.
--
derek

I agree--top posting makes it much easier to see the new stuff right
off if you're following the thread. Plus it helps keep the
attributions straight as people reply. In bottom posting, it becomes
increasingly difficult to decipher who said what. Just make sure you
don't have an automatic sig added to the bottom of the whole post.

Example:
Top posting
~~~~~~~~
I agree.
-- poster3

On Oct 31 poster2 said:
yada yada
-- poster2

On Oct 30 poster1 said:
blah blah
-- poster1
~~~~~~~~

Example:
Bottom posting
~~~~~~~~
On Oct 31 poster2 said:

On Oct 30 poster1 said:
blah blah
-- poster1

yada yada
-- poster2

I agree.
-- poster3
~~~~~~~~

Mary


On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:13:54 GMT, "Nedra"
wrote:

The irritating thing about NOT top posting is that this is supposed to be a
conversation. I know of no one in a conversation who repeats the people
who've just spoken ... that is idiotic.... to me at least.
I hit delete if the person has not had presence of mind
to edit the previous speakers..... even then Bottom Posting is an irritant -
I don't give a hoot what usenet says.

Nedrda in Missouri

I agree--top posting makes it much easier to see the new stuff right
off if you're following the thread. Plus it helps keep the
attributions straight as people reply. In bottom posting, it becomes
increasingly difficult to decipher who said what. Just make sure you
don't have an automatic sig added to the bottom of the whole post.

Example:
Top posting
~~~~~~~~
I agree.
-- poster3

On Oct 31 poster2 said:
yada yada
-- poster2

On Oct 30 poster1 said:
blah blah
-- poster1
~~~~~~~~

Example:
Bottom posting
~~~~~~~~
On Oct 31 poster2 said:

On Oct 30 poster1 said:
blah blah
-- poster1

yada yada
-- poster2

I agree.
-- poster3
~~~~~~~~

Mary


On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:13:54 GMT, "Nedra"
wrote:

The irritating thing about NOT top posting is that this is supposed to be a
conversation. I know of no one in a conversation who repeats the people
who've just spoken ... that is idiotic.... to me at least.
I hit delete if the person has not had presence of mind
to edit the previous speakers..... even then Bottom Posting is an irritant -
I don't give a hoot what usenet says.

Nedrda in Missouri

Yeaaaaa for Fireball!!! There I voted.

Nedra

wrote in message news:418696a2$1@padme....
Why don't you both move this trivial ping pong 'conversation' to a
newsgroup
on the topic of news groups? You case then chase your own tails to your
hearts content and talk about nothing all day. To read 200 posts you must
either have a huge range of hobbies or be a professional news group
reader.
Do either of you actually have a pond? - Don't answer that, we don't want
to know, we are all bored to death.

Stick to ponds, fish, building ponds, etc, not the damn style.

And as for some of the threads I have seen here about damn elections,
rape,
and I don't know what!!!! Give us break!

Fireball.


"Derek Broughton" wrote in message
...
Stephen M. Henning wrote:

The majority of Usenet-users prefer bottom-posting. In addition to

afaik, the majority of Usenet users prefer to read _inline_ posting.
Unfortunately, many of them aren't interested in taking the time,
either.

Bottom-posting is proper Usenet Etiquette. Check out the following URL:

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html

rfc1855 says _nothing_ about bottom posting. The word "bottom" doesn't
even
appear. Of course, the RFC itself says nothing directly about top
posting
either, though it does say "be sure you summarize the original at the
top
of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a
context".

The biggest problem with top-, inline- or bottom- posting or is the
people
who insist on changing the style in the middle of a thread.
--
derek

Yeaaaaa for Fireball!!! There I voted.

Nedra

wrote in message news:418696a2$1@padme....
Why don't you both move this trivial ping pong 'conversation' to a
newsgroup
on the topic of news groups? You case then chase your own tails to your
hearts content and talk about nothing all day. To read 200 posts you must
either have a huge range of hobbies or be a professional news group
reader.
Do either of you actually have a pond? - Don't answer that, we don't want
to know, we are all bored to death.

Stick to ponds, fish, building ponds, etc, not the damn style.

And as for some of the threads I have seen here about damn elections,
rape,
and I don't know what!!!! Give us break!

Fireball.


"Derek Broughton" wrote in message
...
Stephen M. Henning wrote:

The majority of Usenet-users prefer bottom-posting. In addition to

afaik, the majority of Usenet users prefer to read _inline_ posting.
Unfortunately, many of them aren't interested in taking the time,
either.

Bottom-posting is proper Usenet Etiquette. Check out the following URL:

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html

rfc1855 says _nothing_ about bottom posting. The word "bottom" doesn't
even
appear. Of course, the RFC itself says nothing directly about top
posting
either, though it does say "be sure you summarize the original at the
top
of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a
context".

The biggest problem with top-, inline- or bottom- posting or is the
people
who insist on changing the style in the middle of a thread.
--
derek

On or about Mon, 01 Nov 2004 10:26:58 -0600, Mark Bannister
wrote something like:



Nedra wrote:
The irritating thing about NOT top posting is that this is supposed to be a
conversation.

More and more groups I have noticed seem to be using top posting.

It's alway September on the internet . . .

http://www.albion.com/netiquette/



--
Crashj

On or about Mon, 01 Nov 2004 10:26:58 -0600, Mark Bannister
wrote something like:



Nedra wrote:
The irritating thing about NOT top posting is that this is supposed to be a
conversation.

More and more groups I have noticed seem to be using top posting.

It's alway September on the internet . . .

http://www.albion.com/netiquette/



--
Crashj

On or about Mon, 01 Nov 2004 10:26:58 -0600, Mark Bannister
wrote something like:



Nedra wrote:
The irritating thing about NOT top posting is that this is supposed to be a
conversation.

More and more groups I have noticed seem to be using top posting.

It's alway September on the internet . . .

http://www.albion.com/netiquette/



--
Crashj

On or about Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:38:59 GMT, edu
(Marizel) wrote something like:


Just make sure you
don't have an automatic sig added to the bottom of the whole post.

A good newsreader will trim a properly formatted sig line. Few here
know how to do that, apparently.
--
Crashj

On or about Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:38:59 GMT, edu
(Marizel) wrote something like:


Just make sure you
don't have an automatic sig added to the bottom of the whole post.

A good newsreader will trim a properly formatted sig line. Few here
know how to do that, apparently.
--
Crashj

On or about Mon, 1 Nov 2004 19:58:39 -0000,
wrote something like:

Why don't you both move this trivial ping pong 'conversation' to a newsgroup
on the topic of news groups?

Because it is an issue within this group. Usenet has long ago resolved
the issue. As new people come on board the problem crops up.

Language is not trivial. We are talking about the language and format
we use in RP. This convention gets worked out in most usenet groups
after a while. Topposting marks you as a newbie or worse in most of
the rest of usenet.

OTOH, occasional errors are not a reason to flame anyone. If a group
has not resolved the issue, you just go with the flow. I put up with
it here because there is good information from the regulars and old
hats.

Few threads in this group go past a dozen or so posts, so conversation
confusion is not usually a problem here. If you should wander off to
some other groups you may find yourself the subject of endless torment
and plonking. Your top posts will be unreadable to regular users and
you will find yourself excluded.

We are nicer here. Well, I try to be, since I am still using Free
Agent. For now.
--
Crashj

On or about Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:12:53 GMT, "Nedra"
wrote something like:

Yeaaaaa for Fireball!!! There I voted.

Nedra


I can certainly understand your reaction and I am fine with you all
top posting short conversations, but why won't you trim your posts?
--
Crashj

On or about Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:12:53 GMT, "Nedra"
wrote something like:

Yeaaaaa for Fireball!!! There I voted.

Nedra


I can certainly understand your reaction and I am fine with you all
top posting short conversations, but why won't you trim your posts?
--
Crashj

On or about Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:12:53 GMT, "Nedra"
wrote something like:

Yeaaaaa for Fireball!!! There I voted.

Nedra


I can certainly understand your reaction and I am fine with you all
top posting short conversations, but why won't you trim your posts?
--
Crashj

Derek Broughton wrote:

rfc1855 says _nothing_ about bottom posting. The word "bottom" doesn't even
appear. Of course, the RFC itself says nothing directly about top posting
either, though it does say "be sure you summarize the original at the top
of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a
context".

"be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message" is the
essence of bottom posting.