|
O/T just a thought
I dont want to start a war, just throwing out a simple suggestion ;-)
As many newbies come into groups with their questions or comments there is a tendancy, if they are not sure of things, to top post, as was the case when I first started posting. Generally somebody points out the error of their ways and one of two things happen, either a) the poster takes it well and goes on to bottom posting or b) the poster takes offence and a minor squabble ensues and the whole top/bottom posting debate rears it's ugly head. I've seen this happen again and again. I just wondered if people put a line under their sig..eg...please bottom post for clarity...(or something along those lines)perhaps new lurkers would know straight away it's prefered and when they do finally post they can get right down to the subject of their post with the minimum of bad feeling? Just a thought :-) Shannie |
O/T just a thought
Fine.
Ok, Please could you explain what 'top' and 'bottom' posting are please??? |
O/T just a thought
Bottom posting means putting your reply beneath a copy of the original
posting - the logical place for the convenience of people who haven't been following the thread. Top posting is like this ... with the original post beneath for reference. Considerate posters will snip (delete) out parts of the original post that aren't relevant to their reply. Personally I detest bottom posting since it often involves scrolling through reams of quoted posts and answers which I've already seen and that someone has been too idle to snip! In truth it really doesn't matter too much - people get worked up about the strangest things.... "Helen" wrote in message om... Fine. Ok, Please could you explain what 'top' and 'bottom' posting are please??? |
O/T just a thought
Peter Goddard wrote:
: Bottom posting means putting your reply beneath a copy of the original : posting - the logical place for the convenience of people who haven't : been following the thread. : Top posting is like this ... with the original post beneath for : reference. Considerate posters will snip (delete) out parts of the : original post that aren't relevant to their reply. : : Personally I detest bottom posting since it often involves scrolling : through reams of quoted posts and answers which I've already seen and : that someone has been too idle to snip! : : In truth it really doesn't matter too much - people get worked up : about the strangest things.... : : "Helen" wrote in message : om... :: Fine. :: Ok, Please could you explain what 'top' and 'bottom' posting are :: please??? I'm glad i found someone else who agrees! Seems to me only common sense to top post but as you see I complied for a bit of peace Robert The Devil's Advocate www.pafc.co.uk |
O/T just a thought
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 07:49:21 +0100, "Peter Goddard"
wrote: Personally I detest bottom posting since it often involves scrolling through reams of quoted posts and answers which I've already seen and that someone has been too idle to snip! In truth it really doesn't matter too much - people get worked up about the strangest things.... I agree w. If you follow the tread from the beginning you don't need to read the earlier posts over and over. If people snip sensibly it is fine, but to scroll through 3 pages and then find "Thanks I'll try that" is a total waste of time. I know there will never be agreement on this and we have to go with the majority and netiquette. Pam in Bristol |
O/T just a thought
In article , Robert the_devils_advo
writes Peter Goddard wrote: : Bottom posting means putting your reply beneath a copy of the original : posting - the logical place for the convenience of people who haven't : been following the thread. : Top posting is like this ... with the original post beneath for : reference. Considerate posters will snip (delete) out parts of the : original post that aren't relevant to their reply. : : Personally I detest bottom posting since it often involves scrolling : through reams of quoted posts and answers which I've already seen and : that someone has been too idle to snip! : : In truth it really doesn't matter too much - people get worked up : about the strangest things.... : : "Helen" wrote in message : om... :: Fine. :: Ok, Please could you explain what 'top' and 'bottom' posting are :: please??? I'm glad i found someone else who agrees! Seems to me only common sense to top post but as you see I complied for a bit of peace Thereby muddling the thread! ;-) Worst of all is a mixture, and since the usenet convention is bottom posting, it's easier to go with that than to get the majority to change just for this one ng. -- Kay Easton Edward's earthworm page: http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm |
O/T just a thought
"Pam Moore" wrote in message ... snip I agree w. If you follow the tread from the beginning you don't need to read the earlier posts over and over. If people snip sensibly it is fine, but to scroll through 3 pages and then find "Thanks I'll try that" is a total waste of time. I know there will never be agreement on this and we have to go with the majority and netiquette. Pam in Bristol Pam, I agree with you. Snipping is the most important thing and, although I do bottom post, it drives me mad having to plough through the same stuff over and over again when following a thread. Pretty often I just give up and probably miss interesting comments. Iris McCanna |
O/T just a thought
In article ,
"Peter Goddard" wrote: snip Personally I detest bottom posting since it often involves scrolling through reams of quoted posts and answers which I've already seen and that someone has been too idle to snip! In truth it really doesn't matter too much - people get worked up about the strangest things.... "Helen" wrote in message om... Fine. Ok, Please could you explain what 'top' and 'bottom' posting are please??? Exactly! Ah! So if the new text is at the top, we have to scroll all the way to the bottom to start reading. Well, many newservers have poor retention and we don't always get to see the the start of a thread do we? Thank you. What was that about coming in part way through? Well, this line is an example. Please illustrate with an example? Because it makes thread that you have come into part of the way through difficult to follow. Why is that then? Top posting is ill-mannered and confusing. -- "I go online sometimes, but...everyone's spelling is really bad, and...it's depressing" |
O/T just a thought
"Kay Easton" wrote in message ... In article , Robert the_devils_advo writes Peter Goddard wrote: : Bottom posting means putting your reply beneath a copy of the original : posting - the logical place for the convenience of people who haven't : been following the thread. : Top posting is like this ... with the original post beneath for : reference. Considerate posters will snip (delete) out parts of the : original post that aren't relevant to their reply. : : Personally I detest bottom posting since it often involves scrolling : through reams of quoted posts and answers which I've already seen and : that someone has been too idle to snip! : : In truth it really doesn't matter too much - people get worked up : about the strangest things.... : : "Helen" wrote in message : om... :: Fine. :: Ok, Please could you explain what 'top' and 'bottom' posting are :: please??? I'm glad i found someone else who agrees! Seems to me only common sense to top post but as you see I complied for a bit of peace Thereby muddling the thread! ;-) Worst of all is a mixture, and since the usenet convention is bottom I prefer middle posting myself. It's as ridiculous and difficult to read as bottom posting, whilst disobeying convention the same way top-posting does, thus pleasing everybody. X. posting, it's easier to go with that than to get the majority to change just for this one ng. -- Kay Easton Edward's earthworm page: http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm |
O/T just a thought
"shannie" wrote in message
... I dont want to start a war, just throwing out a simple suggestion ;-) Toooooo late :-) As many newbies come into groups with their questions or comments there is a tendancy, if they are not sure of things, to top post, as was the case when I first started posting. That's because it's common sense to top-post. Nearly all newsreaders are designed in such a way to encourage it, both in reading and writing posts. Try using google groups, it's impossible to keep up with long posts when they're bottom posted. It just takes too long to follow conversations. Generally somebody points out the error of their ways and one of two things happen, either a) the poster takes it well and goes on to bottom posting or b) the poster takes offence and a minor squabble ensues and the whole top/bottom posting debate rears it's ugly head. I've seen this happen again and again. I just wondered if people put a line under their sig..eg...please bottom post for clarity...(or something along those lines) What about "Please bottom post because of another geeky convention designed to make usenet less friendly to newcomers" rhaps new lurkers would know straight away it's prefered and when they do finally post they can get right down to the subject of their post with the minimum of bad feeling? Just a thought :-) Shannie There *is* a logic to bottom posting, but the structure of usenet wasn't designed to make bottom posting the elegant process it should have been. Take a look at a good web-forum such as vbulletin, there you'll see how bottom posting works well, it's integral to the structure of the forum, not in the way people structure their replies. X. |
O/T just a thought
In article , shannie
writes I dont want to start a war, just throwing out a simple suggestion ;-) As many newbies come into groups with their questions or comments there is a tendancy, if they are not sure of things, to top post, as was the case Shannie, the group had this conversation years ago and it is the main reason why the abc for newcomers is posted regularly. We hoped that newbies would read it, understand what the 'group' consensus was (we realise that there are a minority who don't agree with the abc) and act accordingly. Did *you* read the abc or were our efforts all those years ago in vain? -- Jane Ransom in Lancaster. I won't respond to private emails that are on topic for urg but if you need to email me for any other reason, put jandg dot demon dot co dot uk where you see deadspam.com |
O/T just a thought
Did *you* read the abc or were our efforts all those years ago in vain? -- Jane Ransom in Lancaster. I won't respond to private emails that are on topic for urg but if you need to email me for any other reason, put jandg dot demon dot co dot uk where you see deadspam.com When I joined URG I did not see the "abc for newcomers" to read before posting. Unfortunately it is not the first posting you see when you join :-( Natalie |
O/T just a thought
"Jane Ransom" wrote in message ... Shannie, the group had this conversation years ago and it is the main reason why the abc for newcomers is posted regularly. We hoped that newbies would read it, understand what the 'group' consensus was (we realise that there are a minority who don't agree with the abc) and act accordingly. Did *you* read the abc or were our efforts all those years ago in vain? No Jane, I have to admit that initially I did not read it as I didn't know it existed :( When I first started on newsgroups I knew relatively nothing, I didn't know about faq's or guidelines or anything else. What happened in my case was,( as Im sure has been the case with others) It was recommended to me that I try newsgroups, however I didn't know about the 'rules'. So in I ploughed with both feet. It was in fact a member here who pointed me in the right direction and I found the faq's, the abc and the websites. I wish I *had* known about them before posting, but obviously didn't 'lurk' long enough. Your collective efforts were not in vain at all, it's concise and well organised and easy to understand but there are always those of us who miss it initially. Shannie |
O/T just a thought
"Jane Ransom" wrote in message ... In article , shannie writes I dont want to start a war, just throwing out a simple suggestion ;-) As many newbies come into groups with their questions or comments there is a tendancy, if they are not sure of things, to top post, as was the case Shannie, the group had this conversation years ago and it is the main reason why the abc for newcomers is posted regularly. We hoped that newbies would read it, understand what the 'group' consensus was (we realise that there are a minority who don't agree with the abc) and act accordingly. Did *you* read the abc or were our efforts all those years ago in vain? No Jane, I have to admit that initially I did not read it as I didn't know it existed :( When I first started on newsgroups I knew relatively nothing, I didn't know about faq's or guidelines or anything else. What happened in my case was,( as Im sure has been the case with others) It was recommended to me that I try newsgroups, however I didn't know about the 'rules'. So in I ploughed with both feet. It was in fact a member here who pointed me in the right direction and I found the faq's, the abc and the websites. I wish I *had* known about them before posting, but obviously didn't 'lurk' long enough. Your collective efforts were not in vain at all, it's concise and well organised and easy to understand but there are always those of us who miss it initially. That being said, the abc actually doesn't refer to top or bottom posting as far as I can see, just to the nonposting of binaries and editing down messages to keep them concise. Shannie |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:21 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter