The one you send to top-posters - runs to four lines, in reverse order...

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

On 08/03/2023 12:37, RustyHinge wrote:
> The one you send to top-posters - runs to four lines, in reverse order...

There's a couple of two-liners.

Who's there?
Knock knock.

A: Because it makes posts difficult to follow.
Q: Why shouldn't I top post?

On 08/03/2023 23:15, Mike Fleming wrote:
> On 08/03/2023 12:37, RustyHinge wrote:
>> The one you send to top-posters - runs to four lines, in reverse order...
>
> There's a couple of two-liners.
>
> Who's there?
> Knock knock.
>
> A: Because it makes posts difficult to follow.
> Q: Why shouldn't I top post?

Ta. IIRC there's a four liner incorporating the second one.

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:37:26 +0000
RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:

> The one you send to top-posters - runs to four lines, in reverse order...

Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Top-posting.
What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 09/03/2023 05:32, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:37:26 +0000
> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> The one you send to top-posters - runs to four lines, in reverse order...
>
> Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> Top-posting.
> What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

Ah - thassaone.

Thanks: bro' outlaw about to learn that one...

Just sent him a properly-followed-up massage under my original with his
reply on top

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote in
news:tuccl5$1dg8k$1@dont-email.me:

> On 09/03/2023 05:32, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:37:26 +0000
>> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> The one you send to top-posters - runs to four lines, in reverse
>>> order...
>>
>> Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
>> Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>> Top-posting.
>> What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>
> Ah - thassaone.
>
> Thanks: bro' outlaw about to learn that one...
>
> Just sent him a properly-followed-up massage under my original with
> his reply on top

You're sure he isn't blind and using a screen reader? I'm surprised Brian
hasn't said anything.

--
Peter
-----

On 09/03/2023 11:37, Peter wrote:
> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote in
> news:tuccl5$1dg8k$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 09/03/2023 05:32, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:37:26 +0000
>>> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The one you send to top-posters - runs to four lines, in reverse
>>>> order...
>>>
>>> Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
>>> Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>>> Top-posting.
>>> What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>>
>> Ah - thassaone.
>>
>> Thanks: bro' outlaw about to learn that one...
>>
>> Just sent him a properly-followed-up massage under my original with
>> his reply on top
>
> You're sure he isn't blind and using a screen reader? I'm surprised Brian
> hasn't said anything.

Possibubbly, but unlikely that the deception desk at the sturgery has an
unsighted attendant - our practice is pretty up-to-date but I don't
goove it's *that* modern.

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
> On 09/03/2023 11:37, Peter wrote:
>> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote in
>> news:tuccl5$1dg8k$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> On 09/03/2023 05:32, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:37:26 +0000
>>>> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The one you send to top-posters - runs to four lines, in reverse
>>>>> order...
>>>>
>>>> Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
>>>> Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>>>> Top-posting.
>>>> What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>>>
>>> Ah - thassaone.
>>>
>>> Thanks: bro' outlaw about to learn that one...
>>>
>>> Just sent him a properly-followed-up massage under my original with
>>> his reply on top
>>
>> You're sure he isn't blind and using a screen reader? I'm surprised Brian
>> hasn't said anything.
>
> Possibubbly, but unlikely that the deception desk at the sturgery has an
> unsighted attendant - our practice is pretty up-to-date but I don't
> goove it's *that* modern.
>

Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
Usenet posting.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 9 Mar 2023 16:23:05 GMT, Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:

> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 09/03/2023 11:37, Peter wrote:
>>> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote in
>>> news:tuccl5$1dg8k$1@dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>> On 09/03/2023 05:32, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:37:26 +0000 RustyHinge
>>>>> <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The one you send to top-posters - runs to four lines, in reverse
>>>>>> order...
>>>>>
>>>>> Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
>>>>> Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>>>>> Top-posting.
>>>>> What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>>>>
>>>> Ah - thassaone.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks: bro' outlaw about to learn that one...
>>>>
>>>> Just sent him a properly-followed-up massage under my original with
>>>> his reply on top
>>>
>>> You're sure he isn't blind and using a screen reader? I'm surprised
>>> Brian hasn't said anything.
>>
>> Possibubbly, but unlikely that the deception desk at the sturgery has
>> an unsighted attendant - our practice is pretty up-to-date but I don't
>> goove it's *that* modern.
>>
>>
> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
> Usenet posting.
>
> Tim

Not in this corner of the shed it ain't!

Avpx

--
One day I'll be dead and THEN you'll all be sorry.
(alt.fan.pratchett)
Thu 10782 Sep 17:20:01 GMT 1993
17:20:01 up 1 day, 8:46, 8 users, load average: 0.18, 0.20, 0.32

In message <HDoOL.4006864$MJk2.2793320@usenetxs.com>, The Nomad
<nomad@the.desert.invalid> writes
>On 9 Mar 2023 16:23:05 GMT, Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
>> Usenet posting.
>>
>> Tim
>
>Not in this corner of the shed it ain't!
>

Wot e sed

Adrian
--
To Reply :
replace "bulleid" with "adrian" - all mail to bulleid is rejected
Sorry for the rigmarole, If I want spam, I'll go to the shops
Every time someone says "I don't believe in trolls", another one dies.

On 09/03/2023 16:23, Tim+ wrote:
<Snip>
> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
> Usenet posting.
>
> Tim
>
When the e-mail is a replacement for a letter in business, the the norm
is top posting. With all earlier mail in the conversation appended below
your reply for the other party's convenience.

Everywhere else I use e-mail, I answer each point in its place, so the
other party has an immediate remnder of what they posted.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On 9 Mar 2023 16:23:05 GMT
Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:

> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
> Usenet posting.

Not on mailing lists where interleaved posting is usually the norm,
but rather in corporate settings and similar where the only way to get the
context is if it is *all* included in the email you get when the thread
first reaches you. Having to read it bottom to top is a one-off PITA price
you pay for having it at all. Bottom posting would make that easier at the
price of making it harder to find where to start reading updates.

It's horse for courses as always - with the occasional idiot trying
to take a motorbike (iron horse) over the steeplechase course.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

In message <20230309182707.aa046d82015e773d05669ca8@eircom.net>, Ahem A
Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes
>On 9 Mar 2023 16:23:05 GMT
>Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
>> Usenet posting.
>
> Not on mailing lists where interleaved posting is usually the norm,
>but rather in corporate settings and similar where the only way to get the
>context is if it is *all* included in the email you get when the thread
>first reaches you. Having to read it bottom to top is a one-off PITA price
>you pay for having it at all. Bottom posting would make that easier at the
>price of making it harder to find where to start reading updates.
>
> It's horse for courses as always - with the occasional idiot trying
>to take a motorbike (iron horse) over the steeplechase course.
>

My usual e-mail client Turnpike posts both e-mail and Usenet at the
bottom.

It also strips out signatures provided the sig separator is correct. I
find I have to strip out all legalise stuff and other cruft these days
as people have tended to stop using them.

I use Thunderbird on the lapdog cos it's 64bit. It does e-mails at the
top and Usenet at the bottom. I don't think I can change this.

Brian

--
Brian Howie

On 09/03/2023 18:59, brian wrote:

> I use Thunderbird on the lapdog cos it's 64bit. It does e-mails at the
> top and Usenet at the bottom. I don't think I can change this.
>
Thunderguts here opens mail to reply with the cursor at the top or
bottom, depending. Moving it is a matter of a click on the mouse. Click
where you want to reply, and Bob's your uncle.

When I am chatting with someone who expects replies to be top posted is
a pain, as I need to constantly refer to the original either by
scrolling or tabbing to the inccoming mail.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 9 Mar 2023 16:23:05 GMT
> Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
>> Usenet posting.
>
> Not on mailing lists where interleaved posting is usually the norm,
> but rather in corporate settings and similar where the only way to get the
> context is if it is *all* included in the email you get when the thread
> first reaches you. Having to read it bottom to top is a one-off PITA price
> you pay for having it at all. Bottom posting would make that easier at the
> price of making it harder to find where to start reading updates.
>
> It's horse for courses as always - with the occasional idiot trying
> to take a motorbike (iron horse) over the steeplechase course.
>

Yeah well, mailing lists are different. Multiple replies and many
contributors which makes interleaved replies and bottom posting much more
sensible.

My point was that top post is normal practice in some circumstance.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 09/03/2023 16:23, Tim+ wrote:
>
> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
> Usenet posting.

It didn't use to be.

On 09/03/2023 16:23, Tim+ wrote:
> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 09/03/2023 11:37, Peter wrote:
>>> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote in
>>> news:tuccl5$1dg8k$1@dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>> On 09/03/2023 05:32, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:37:26 +0000
>>>>> RustyHinge <rusty.hinge@foobar.girolle.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The one you send to top-posters - runs to four lines, in reverse
>>>>>> order...
>>>>>
>>>>> Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
>>>>> Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>>>>> Top-posting.
>>>>> What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>>>>
>>>> Ah - thassaone.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks: bro' outlaw about to learn that one...
>>>>
>>>> Just sent him a properly-followed-up massage under my original with
>>>> his reply on top
>>>
>>> You're sure he isn't blind and using a screen reader? I'm surprised Brian
>>> hasn't said anything.
>>
>> Possibubbly, but unlikely that the deception desk at the sturgery has an
>> unsighted attendant - our practice is pretty up-to-date but I don't
>> goove it's *that* modern.
>>
>
> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
> Usenet posting.

NIME

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

On 09/03/2023 18:59, brian wrote:
> In message <20230309182707.aa046d82015e773d05669ca8@eircom.net>, Ahem A
> Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes
>> On 9 Mar 2023 16:23:05 GMT
>> Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
>>> Usenet posting.
>>
>>       Not on mailing lists where interleaved posting is usually the norm,
>> but rather in corporate settings and similar where the only way to get
>> the
>> context is if it is *all* included in the email you get when the thread
>> first reaches you. Having to read it bottom to top is a one-off PITA
>> price
>> you pay for having it at all. Bottom posting would make that easier at
>> the
>> price of making it harder to find where to start reading updates.
>>
>>       It's horse for courses as always - with the occasional idiot trying
>> to take a motorbike (iron horse) over the steeplechase course.
>>
>
> My usual e-mail client Turnpike posts both e-mail and Usenet at the bottom.
>
> It also strips out signatures provided the sig separator is correct. I
> find I have to strip out all legalise stuff  and other cruft these days
> as people have tended to stop using them.
>
> I use Thunderbird on the lapdog cos it's 64bit. It does e-mails at the
> top and Usenet at the bottom. I don't think I can change this.

I use Thunderbird - have you *ever* known me to top-post except to the
odd Brian (Gaff) post, and I have to override Mañuelly my usual settings
to do that.

--
Rusty Hinge
To err is human. To really foul things up requires a computer and the BOFH.

Mike Fleming <mike@tauzero.co.uk> writes:

> On 09/03/2023 16:23, Tim+ wrote:
>
>> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
>> Usenet posting.
>
> It didn't use to be.

In the business corresponence or other formal context, I've often seen
in an email mssg the entire body of the previous mssg to which it is a
reply appended at the *end*. I have no trouble with that. I even do
it occasionally.

In the conversational context -- mailing lists, Usenet, frequent
exchanges with friends -- partial quoting, snipping, mixed original
and quoted text works better. You want to keep the conversation
going, not study or parse exactly a formal text. You don't usually
need a "for the record" document to set context for the current
message as you may in formal, infrequent correspondence.

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

On 10 Mar 2023 01:39:39 -0400
Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:

> In the business corresponence or other formal context, I've often seen
> in an email mssg the entire body of the previous mssg to which it is a
> reply appended at the *end*. I have no trouble with that. I even do
> it occasionally.

I have always seen top posting and full quoting in that context.
Bottom works just as well provided nothing is snipped but I've never seen
it done. Either way it makes an awful mess if someone makes an interleaved
response.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 9 Mar 2023 16:23:05 GMT, Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Do bear in mind that top posting is actually the norm for email, unlike
> Usenet posting.

A curse put upon us by those morons at Microsoft who would
like you to think that they invented e-mail.

There are users of e-mail that do not know you can delete
useless text in e-mail, let alone use the cursor put text where you
want it.

Then there are is the damage done by the Goggle monster to
e-mail.

--
The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour
to lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly
ignores the fact that it was he, by peddling second rate technology,
led them into it in the first place, and continues to do so today. -
Douglas Adams, Guardian 1995

Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>
> It's horse for courses as always - with the occasional idiot trying
> to take a motorbike (iron horse) over the steeplechase course.

I've never understood why people enjoy chasing steeples.

--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 08:54:42 -0000 (UTC)
Richard Robinson <richard@qualmograph.org.uk> wrote:

> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
> >
> > It's horse for courses as always - with the occasional idiot
> > trying to take a motorbike (iron horse) over the steeplechase course.
>
> I've never understood why people enjoy chasing steeples.

They're easier to catch than rainbows.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 07:59:31 -0000 (UTC)
Julian Macassey <julian@n6are.com> wrote:

> There are users of e-mail that do not know you can delete
> useless text in e-mail, let alone use the cursor put text where you
> want it.

In contexts where top posting is the norm that text is not useless,
it is essential! Unless the entire chain is present and complete in the
email someone getting added to the Cc list has nowhere to find the context.

It is only in mailing lists, USENET and 1:1 mail exchanges that
interleaved posting and snipping makes sense. The key factor being that the
context is available to all participants without needing it to be in the
message.

In corporate settings where an email chain is usually an ongoing
conversation between a growing group of people full quoting is essential
and top posting is more convenient than bottom (except for the one-off
catch up by reading bottom to top). If you snip and interleave in that
context you will mess things up for anyone who joins afterwards. The key
factor being that there is nowhere else for the context except in the
message.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 2023-03-10, Richard Robinson <richard@qualmograph.org.uk> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot said:
>>
>> It's horse for courses as always - with the occasional idiot trying
>> to take a motorbike (iron horse) over the steeplechase course.
>
> I've never understood why people enjoy chasing steeples.
>
>

Generally, the oversight is far less strict. Originally, church
steeples (of the authorized type) were easily seen. As they say, don't
go down that route, or we might have another Bishop's war.

--
greymausg@mail.com
where is our money gone, Dude?