Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting
Tags:
Evidently, GMANE
warns you if you top-post, and refuses to accept the post unless you
change. It’s interesting to see how people rationalize seemingly
artibrary conventions. I am almost convinced …
Original URL:
I laughed over this quote — but that’s besides the point:
"The day Microsoft makes something that doesn’t suck is probably
the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
Evidently, GMANE
warns you if you top-post, and refuses to accept the post unless you
change. It’s interesting to see how people rationalize seemingly
artibrary conventions. I am almost convinced …
Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting
By A. Smit and
H.W. de Haan
Definitions:
Top-posting: Writing the message above the original text, when one
replies to an email or a post in a newsgroup.
Bottom-posting: The opposite of top-posting. Now the new message is
placed below the original text.
We are fanatic Usenet-readers. As a result we are often annoyed by
people who keep top-posting. This is considered as not good ‘Net
etiquette’. The majority of Usenet-users prefer bottom-posting.
- Because it is proper Usenet Etiquette. Check out the following URL:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html . - We use a good news reader like Forte Agent. Good newsreaders like Agent
put the signature by default at the end of the post, which is the Usenet
convention. - Top-posting makes posts incomprehensible. Firstly: In normal
conversations, one does not answer to something that has not yet been
said. - Top-posting inevitably leads to long posts, because most
top-posters leave the original message intact. - Top-posting makes it hard for bottom-posters to reply to the relevant
parts