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

Fine.
Ok, Please could you explain what 'top' and 'bottom' posting are please???

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???

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

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

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

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

"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

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"

"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

"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.

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

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

"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

"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