Stop top posting

February 2, 200817 yr

And I wish everyone would top post. I doubt either of us will get our

wish.

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:47:55 +0000 (UTC), john sumner

<js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote:

>I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop the

>top posting, bottom post please.

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

Actually, in most cases I don't need to read the quoted text as I read

newsgroups sorted by conversation so in most cases I probably just READ the

text in the previous message and don't need to see it again. If I do THEN I

can just scroll down to see what was said. Usually the most relevant

content is near the top with the older text (which I had probably read on

previous days) is safely at the bottom of them message where I don't have to

wade through it. Also if we make sure our posts are complete thoughts,

usually the reader won't need the previous post to figure out what I'm

talking about.

--

Mark R. Cusumano

Skype Name: mark.cusumano

Web: http://The-Padded-Cell.spaces.live.com

"Charlie42" <Charlie42@spam.me.not> wrote in message

news:ecH8asCZIHA.1212@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> "john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote:

>

>>I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop

>>the

>> top posting, bottom post please.

>

> Charlie42

>

> to keep track of.

> very hard

> It makes discussions

> hate top posting.

> Personally, I

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

I use Windows Live Mail and set it to top post so mine automatically opens

at the top by default. I have noticed that bottom posters then to be the

ones that leave one or two word posts or threads that compose essentially of

the....

> are so!

>> am not!!

>>> are so!

type of conversation anyway.

--

Mark R. Cusumano

Skype Name: mark.cusumano

Web: http://The-Padded-Cell.spaces.live.com

"Robyn" <Robyn@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:006E68D1-DB44-47EA-9503-88ABDF809512@microsoft.com...

> I will keep top posting and that's that! Don't like it, too bad!! This

> is

> where it opens when I reply to a post within the microsoft discussion

> groups,

> I don't use my windows live mail for newsgroups!

> --

> Robyn

>

> "David B." wrote:

>

>> I'd rather you top post.

>>

>> --

>>

>> ----

>> Crosspost, do not multipost http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm

>> How to ask a question http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

>> _________________________________________________________________________________

>>

>> "john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message

>> news:Xns9A366DD825877jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.net...

>> >I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop

>> >the

>> > top posting, bottom post please.

>>

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

Actually for the most part this newsgroup is EXTREMELY informative. I can't

tell you the number of things I have learned reading this group from the

many people who have contributed information here. I just ignore most of

the conversation as background noise and static.

--

Mark R. Cusumano

Skype Name: mark.cusumano

Web: http://The-Padded-Cell.spaces.live.com

"john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message

news:Xns9A36F3F66484Ejp33441aolcom@news.albasani.net...

> =?Utf-8?B?Um9ieW4=?= <Robyn@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in

> news:006E68D1-DB44-47EA-9503-88ABDF809512@microsoft.com:

>

>> I will keep top posting and that's that! Don't like it, too bad!!

>> This is where it opens when I reply to a post within the microsoft

>> discussion groups, I don't use my windows live mail for newsgroups!

>

> man you sond very hostile, i understand why you all like to top post and i

> will still read this group, because i might learn something

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

Actually I stand corrected. If you are going to post a one word response

such as ... WHY? you should bottom post or at least place your post in

context to the message you are replying to. Top posting a one word answer

is a but confusing. Take the time and assume the other person doesn't have

the time to go find out what you are referring to and include it in your

answer.

--

Mark R. Cusumano

Skype Name: mark.cusumano

Web: http://The-Padded-Cell.spaces.live.com

"Twayne" <nodoby@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message

news:EAOoj.13603$K%.2878@trnddc04...

> Why?

>

>> john sumner <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote:

>>

>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote in

>>

>>>> Yep, only one thing worse that Live Mail for newsgroup use....

>>>> a web interface !

>>>

>>> Thats why i have google in my bozo bin, too many cluless people,

>>> makes the old aol look a lot smarter<BG>

>>

>> Agreed but I've found I finally had to scorefile people using the

>> horrible CDO for posting, again, too many clueless people.

>>

>> BTW, you might want to update your copy of Xnews, your version is 6

>> years old and there have been a lot of new releases since. The

>> current version is 2006.08.24

>>

>> Reference:

>> http://blinkynet.net/comp/xnewsrels.html

>

> --

> Twayne

>

> Tired of MS Office and their shananigans?

> Try this free replacement:

> http://www.openoffice.org

>

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

Mark R. Cusumano wrote:

> I use Windows Live Mail and set it to top post so mine automatically

> opens at the top by default. I have noticed that bottom posters then to

> be the ones that leave one or two word posts or threads that compose

> essentially of the....

>

>> are so!

>>> am not!!

>>>> are so!

>

> type of conversation anyway.

>

I think your statement is false concerning bottom posters.

In all Usenet reality, (which you are not part of) posting at the bottom

of quoted text makes it easy for people to read the complete thread as

following it is easy. You and others who top post break the fluidity of

the thread which is a shame. Why be self centered, just post the way

that is appropriate and Usenet community accepted. Can you handle that?

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

"Mark R. Cusumano" <spam@bitbucket.com> wrote in

news:PuudnXepVYP16jnanZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@comcast.com:

> Actually for the most part this newsgroup is EXTREMELY informative. I

> can't tell you the number of things I have learned reading this group

> from the many people who have contributed information here. I just

> ignore most of the conversation as background noise and static.

Mark i agree about that, have learned a lot about it, since i have joined

and i guess about top posting i am somewhat old school<G>

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

Hi Mark,

Even with a one word answer top posting works fine if the relevant info one

is replying to is included directly below.

"Mark R. Cusumano" <spam@bitbucket.com> wrote in message

news:7dadnW5-j6Xp5TnanZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@comcast.com...

> Actually I stand corrected. If you are going to post a one word response

> such as ... WHY? you should bottom post or at least place your post in

> context to the message you are replying to. Top posting a one word answer

> is a but confusing. Take the time and assume the other person doesn't

> have the time to go find out what you are referring to and include it in

> your answer.

>

> --

> Mark R. Cusumano

> Skype Name: mark.cusumano

> Web: http://The-Padded-Cell.spaces.live.com

>

> "Twayne" <nodoby@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message

> news:EAOoj.13603$K%.2878@trnddc04...

>> Why?

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

"Bob" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote in

news:mf6dnU_LTKY95jnanZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@comcast.com:

> Hi Mark,

> Even with a one word answer top posting works fine if the relevant

> info one is replying to is included directly below.

I do try not to have one word answers, but sometimes it is too tempting<G>

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

Ok.

"john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message

news:Xns9A385F5C6E072jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.net...

> "Bob" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote in

> news:mf6dnU_LTKY95jnanZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@comcast.com:

>

>> Hi Mark,

>> Even with a one word answer top posting works fine if the relevant

>> info one is replying to is included directly below.

> I do try not to have one word answers, but sometimes it is too tempting<G>

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

Why? Top posting is easier and faster when reading replies in a thread. No

having to scroll down to the bottom to read a reply. I've never understood

why anyone would bottom post. I own some newsgroups and everyone

has always top posted their replies. It's the common sense natural way to do

it, and it would never even occur to anyone on our groups to bottom post a

reply. Sometimes the threads can get quite long and it would be a huge waste

of time if we had to scroll down to read the next reply in each message if

people bottom posted their replies. It would be crazy to use bottom posting

with a thread that might have replies a dozen levels deep. With top posting

you can read the thread and follow the conversation quickly and easily. I'm

wondering...do you group your messages by conversation? I use OE in XP and

Windows Mail in Vista as newsreaders and have always grouped messages by

conversation.

Richard

"john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message

news:Xns9A366DD825877jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.net...

I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop the

top posting, bottom post please.

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

"Bob" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote:

> Even with a one word answer top posting works fine

You just proved it isn't.

--

XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups

The Usenet Improvement Project:

http://improve-usenet.org

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 2, 200817 yr

Well said, Richard!

--

John Barnett MVP

Associate Expert

Windows - Shell/User

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org

Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any

kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,

reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for

any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the

use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this

mail/post..

"Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:%23SZjOkaZIHA.3652@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Why? Top posting is easier and faster when reading replies in a thread. No

> having to scroll down to the bottom to read a reply. I've never understood

> why anyone would bottom post. I own some newsgroups and everyone

> has always top posted their replies. It's the common sense natural way to

> do

> it, and it would never even occur to anyone on our groups to bottom post a

> reply. Sometimes the threads can get quite long and it would be a huge

> waste

> of time if we had to scroll down to read the next reply in each message if

> people bottom posted their replies. It would be crazy to use bottom

> posting

> with a thread that might have replies a dozen levels deep. With top

> posting

> you can read the thread and follow the conversation quickly and easily.

> I'm

> wondering...do you group your messages by conversation? I use OE in XP and

> Windows Mail in Vista as newsreaders and have always grouped messages by

> conversation.

>

> Richard

>

> "john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message

> news:Xns9A366DD825877jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.net...

> I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop

> the

> top posting, bottom post please.

>

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 3, 200817 yr

John Barnett MVP wrote:

> Well said, Richard!

>

Except he hasn't got a clue about what he's saying. No wonder you'd

appreciate it. BTW, your top posting results in this ...

Cheers.

PS. So he "owns" a number of newsgroups. That makes a lot of sense, doesn't

it Mr. MVP?

--

Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4/Astronomy2/PreformanceMonitor.jpg

California 5150 Notice:

All attempts to try and convince Frank to seek help for his mental

problems have failed. The State of California has no option left but

to issue the following 5150 order within the next 24 hours.

http://tinyurl.com/y2y66g

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 3, 200817 yr

Thanks!

Richard

"John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote in message

news:773448EF-F12A-470A-8788-29FA41824CCB@microsoft.com...

Well said, Richard!

--

John Barnett MVP

Associate Expert

Windows - Shell/User

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org

Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any

kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,

reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for

any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the

use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this

mail/post..

"Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:%23SZjOkaZIHA.3652@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Why? Top posting is easier and faster when reading replies in a thread. No

> having to scroll down to the bottom to read a reply. I've never understood

> why anyone would bottom post. I own some newsgroups and everyone

> has always top posted their replies. It's the common sense natural way to

> do

> it, and it would never even occur to anyone on our groups to bottom post a

> reply. Sometimes the threads can get quite long and it would be a huge

> waste

> of time if we had to scroll down to read the next reply in each message if

> people bottom posted their replies. It would be crazy to use bottom

> posting

> with a thread that might have replies a dozen levels deep. With top

> posting

> you can read the thread and follow the conversation quickly and easily.

> I'm

> wondering...do you group your messages by conversation? I use OE in XP and

> Windows Mail in Vista as newsreaders and have always grouped messages by

> conversation.

>

> Richard

>

> "john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message

> news:Xns9A366DD825877jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.net...

> I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop

> the

> top posting, bottom post please.

>

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 3, 200817 yr

In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least

12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you saying

that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all

bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.

What say you?

Richard

"NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:fo31kt11j5h@news2.newsguy.com...

Except he hasn't got a clue about what he's saying. No wonder you'd

appreciate it. BTW, your top posting results in this ...

Cheers.

PS. So he "owns" a number of newsgroups. That makes a lot of sense, doesn't

it Mr. MVP?

--

Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4/Astronomy2/PreformanceMonitor.jpg

California 5150 Notice:

All attempts to try and convince Frank to seek help for his mental

problems have failed. The State of California has no option left but

to issue the following 5150 order within the next 24 hours.

http://tinyurl.com/y2y66g

"John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote in message

news:773448EF-F12A-470A-8788-29FA41824CCB@microsoft.com...

Well said, Richard!

--

John Barnett MVP

Associate Expert

Windows - Shell/User

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org

Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any

kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,

reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for

any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the

use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this

mail/post..

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 3, 200817 yr

"Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:utHZeSmZIHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least

> 12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you saying

> that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all

> bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.

> What say you?

>

> Richard

I say yes.

One of the unwritten rules of Usenet is to trim posts so you don't

have to read everything that went on before. You'd have just enough

of the previous thread to know what was going on without having

followed the thread from the beginning. If a person wants to get to

the end right away, there's always Ctrl-End. Look how many replies

there are in this thread but only the relevant part is in my contribution.

Tom Lake

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 3, 200817 yr

I could care less if folks top post or bottom post,

this argument is so old, antiquated and outdated

I find it hard to believe folks still go on about it.

John, I do find you to be a helpful MVP and you've

been in this group a long time like I have.

However, I do find your sig quite obnoxiously long.

15 lines is just too much.

Since I find your postings generally have value,

blocking you is not an option. I do wish you'd

shorten your sig, though.

-Michael

"John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote in message

news:773448EF-F12A-470A-8788-29FA41824CCB@microsoft.com...

> Well said, Richard!

>

> --

> John Barnett MVP

> Associate Expert

> Windows - Shell/User

>

> Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org

> Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

>

> The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any kind, either

> expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy, reliability or content of this

> mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental or

> consequential damages arising out of the use of, or inability to use, information or opinions

> expressed in this mail/post..

>

> "Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

> news:%23SZjOkaZIHA.3652@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> Why? Top posting is easier and faster when reading replies in a thread. No

>> having to scroll down to the bottom to read a reply. I've never understood

>> why anyone would bottom post. I own some newsgroups and everyone

>> has always top posted their replies. It's the common sense natural way to do

>> it, and it would never even occur to anyone on our groups to bottom post a

>> reply. Sometimes the threads can get quite long and it would be a huge waste

>> of time if we had to scroll down to read the next reply in each message if

>> people bottom posted their replies. It would be crazy to use bottom posting

>> with a thread that might have replies a dozen levels deep. With top posting

>> you can read the thread and follow the conversation quickly and easily. I'm

>> wondering...do you group your messages by conversation? I use OE in XP and

>> Windows Mail in Vista as newsreaders and have always grouped messages by

>> conversation.

>>

>> Richard

>>

>> "john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message

>> news:Xns9A366DD825877jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.net...

>> I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop the

>> top posting, bottom post please.

>>

>

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 3, 200817 yr

Richard Eagle wrote:

> In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least

> 12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you saying

> that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all

> bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.

> What say you?

>

I say that those who top post on Usenet are fscking idiots with no concern

for others. I've already spelled out that REAL newsreaders drop everything

after a sig line. This means that a top post reply essentially ends up

replying to nothing. Down the road, when a computer user is seeking an

answer to a problem and looks into an Usenet archive, such as the ones

Google offers, they will find senseless drivel because of the top posters.

You should be aware that at times messages on one server don't make it out

to other servers, so the idea that thread continuity is always there, just

isn't correct.

Usenet has been around a long long time now (way before the web) and has

established proper ways of doing things. Top posting is NOT one the proper

ways to post on Usenet. If you can't understand this, then you're either

dumb or worse, you're totally inconsiderate and picking up the bad habits

of most of the MVPs around here.

Cheers.

> Richard

>

> "NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message

> news:fo31kt11j5h@news2.newsguy.com...

>

> Except he hasn't got a clue about what he's saying. No wonder you'd

> appreciate it. BTW, your top posting results in this ...

>

> Cheers.

>

> PS. So he "owns" a number of newsgroups. That makes a lot of sense,

> doesn't it Mr. MVP?

>

--

Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4/Astronomy2/PreformanceMonitor.jpg

California 5150 Notice:

All attempts to try and convince Frank to seek help for his mental

problems have failed. The State of California has no option left but

to issue the following 5150 order within the next 24 hours.

http://tinyurl.com/y2y66g

"Yes, I am a troll" ... Frank's friend AlexB (Frankie Boy, let him know

when visiting hours are at the institution.)

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 3, 200817 yr

Trim posts? I would just as soon have anyone replying to me leave the text

of my previous replies in a post intact and unchanged, and similarly, I know

that I don't want to alter anyone else's replies by editing them to trim the

post. How do you determine what to delete and what to leave when you trim a

post to leave "just enough of the previous thread to know what was going on

without having followed the thread from the beginning"? This trimming

obviously takes time and is totally unnecessary with top posting.

Anyway, I don't think that any minds have been changed by this thread so

I guess people will just have to continue to agree to disagree about top

posting vs bottom posting.

Regards,

Richard

"Tom Lake" <toml_12953@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:E76D2120-7A36-440A-BE89-3A85BBB94EC2@microsoft.com...

I say yes.

One of the unwritten rules of Usenet is to trim posts so you don't

have to read everything that went on before. You'd have just enough

of the previous thread to know what was going on without having

followed the thread from the beginning. If a person wants to get to

the end right away, there's always Ctrl-End. Look how many replies

there are in this thread but only the relevant part is in my contribution.

Tom Lake

"Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:utHZeSmZIHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least

> 12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you saying

> that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all

> bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.

> What say you?

>

> Richard

Quote

Mark as Solution

February 3, 200817 yr

Since this is a Microsoft newsgroup on a Microsoft server, it seems to me

that using OE and/or Windows Mail for my newsreader should be fine. Like

many people, I don't use usenet and don't have a REAL newsreader as you

describe. If the MVPs want to post an FAQ telling us to bottom post only and

how to trim replies, etc. to comply with usenet then that would be fine, but

as long as many of them top post then that's good enough for me as well.

As for your reference to the MVPs: "picking up the bad habits of most of the

MVPs around here", I can only say for myself that I know that they are

volunteers and I really appreciate their time and efforts on this group.

They have been helpful to me in the past.

I'm curious...a quick 'find' of replies by nostop shows that you post a lot

here and much of it appears to be pro-Linux / anti-Microsoft or just plain

silly and not very useful for those seeking answers to questions related to

Vista. Do your bottom posted replies end up in the usenet archives? Looks to

me like a lot of it could be considered as the "senseless drivel" that you

are concerned about.

Richard

"NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:fo4l3301po9@news5.newsguy.com...