GUESS WHAT?

> You complaining about anyone else's posting is funny.
>
> E.P.
>

It's the contents that matter to me, my friend. Layouts are for marketeers.

JP Roberts wrote:
> > You complaining about anyone else's posting is funny.
> >
> > E.P.
> >
>
> It's the contents that matter to me, my friend.

There is a saying: "It's not what you say, it's how you say it."
Thus, the form of your communication matters just as much, if not more,
than it's contents.

Top-posting is rude and lazy. I realize that a lot of newsreaders do
it by default, but that doesn't make it right.

> Layouts are for marketeers.

If you believe this has anything to do with something other than
courtesy and etiquette, then you miss the point entirely.

Proper quoting and trimming eliminate every advantage claimed by
top-posters. In addition, it makes posts easier to read, make sense on
a stand-alone basis, and eliminates usenet meta-discussions.

E.P.

wrote:

> Top-posting is rude and lazy.

No it isn't. The problem is your perception.
Those days are long gone. But then I have a life.

Jules wrote:
> wrote:
>
> > Top-posting is rude and lazy.
>
> No it isn't. The problem is your perception.
> Those days are long gone. But then I have a life.

And you waste it by writing in usenet? Wow.

Your comments are exactly the same as everyone else's who seem to find
some aspect of etiquette inconvenient.

I will never be able to perceive of a time when things are read from
bottom to top.

I will say it again - top-posting is rude and lazy.

E.P.

On 7 Apr 2005 14:37:26 -0700, wrote:

>
>Jules wrote:
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Top-posting is rude and lazy.
>>
>> No it isn't. The problem is your perception.
>> Those days are long gone. But then I have a life.
>
>And you waste it by writing in usenet? Wow.
>
>Your comments are exactly the same as everyone else's who seem to find
>some aspect of etiquette inconvenient.
>
>I will never be able to perceive of a time when things are read from
>bottom to top.

That's not what top posting is about. The quote is usually made for
reference, not context and is therefore not required reading.


>I will say it again - top-posting is rude and lazy.

It's just a different style. What's lazy is you being unable to get
used to reading more than one style.



andyt

On 7 Apr 2005 11:20:15 -0700, wrote:

>
>JP Roberts wrote:
>> > You complaining about anyone else's posting is funny.
>> >
>> > E.P.
>> >
>>
>> It's the contents that matter to me, my friend.
>
>There is a saying: "It's not what you say, it's how you say it."

Do you have a problem with people in real life who have different
accents to you? Do you ask them to speak in your accent?


>Thus, the form of your communication matters just as much, if not more,
>than it's contents.

Then you'll be gutted to have used the wrong form of "it's" then?


>Top-posting is rude and lazy. I realize that a lot of newsreaders do
>it by default, but that doesn't make it right.
>
>> Layouts are for marketeers.
>
>If you believe this has anything to do with something other than
>courtesy and etiquette, then you miss the point entirely.

Courtesy is accepting other people's preferences and not whining at
them about it.


>Proper quoting and trimming eliminate every advantage claimed by
>top-posters.

Top-posting ensures that attributions remain correct in multi-level
quotes. See above where it says wrote",
whereupon what is quoted directly below is *not* what you wrote, it's
what someone else wrote. What you actually wrote appears many lines
further down. Top-posting eliminates this problem and therefore
renders your above claim to be untrue.


> In addition, it makes posts easier to read

Only to those who prefer that style. People who prefer top-posting
find top-posting easier to read.


> make sense on a stand-alone basis

Top posts generally do not require context, but quote for reference.
Note how the one which you are whining about makes a comment about the
entire post and then quotes it for reference.


> and eliminates usenet meta-discussions.

You started this one. Learn to accept more than one style of post and
don't be so lazy.



andyt

Andy Turner wrote:
> On 7 Apr 2005 14:37:26 -0700, wrote:
>
>
>>Jules wrote:
>>
wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Top-posting is rude and lazy.
>>>
>>>No it isn't. The problem is your perception.
>>>Those days are long gone. But then I have a life.
>>
>>And you waste it by writing in usenet? Wow.
>>
>>Your comments are exactly the same as everyone else's who seem to find
>>some aspect of etiquette inconvenient.
>>
>>I will never be able to perceive of a time when things are read from
>>bottom to top.
>
>
> That's not what top posting is about. The quote is usually made for
> reference, not context and is therefore not required reading.
>
>
>
>>I will say it again - top-posting is rude and lazy.
>
>
> It's just a different style. What's lazy is you being unable to get
> used to reading more than one style.
>
>
>
> andyt
>
Where can I get a copy of newsgroup etiquette. What is top-posting? Rude
and Lazy? Or do you get arrogant by driving Audis. These posts make me
want dump my Audi and go back to MB. At least they don't damn you for
not being a pro poster.

On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 22:58:26 GMT, Dennis W > wrote:

>Andy Turner wrote:
>> On 7 Apr 2005 14:37:26 -0700, wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Jules wrote:
>>>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Top-posting is rude and lazy.
>>>>
>>>>No it isn't. The problem is your perception.
>>>>Those days are long gone. But then I have a life.
>>>
>>>And you waste it by writing in usenet? Wow.
>>>
>>>Your comments are exactly the same as everyone else's who seem to find
>>>some aspect of etiquette inconvenient.
>>>
>>>I will never be able to perceive of a time when things are read from
>>>bottom to top.
>>
>>
>> That's not what top posting is about. The quote is usually made for
>> reference, not context and is therefore not required reading.
>>
>>
>>
>>>I will say it again - top-posting is rude and lazy.
>>
>>
>> It's just a different style. What's lazy is you being unable to get
>> used to reading more than one style.
>>
>>
>>
>> andyt
>>
>Where can I get a copy of newsgroup etiquette. What is top-posting? Rude
>and Lazy? Or do you get arrogant by driving Audis. These posts make me
>want dump my Audi and go back to MB. At least they don't damn you for
>not being a pro poster.

They must be very accepting of nitwits.

Andy Turner wrote:
> On 7 Apr 2005 11:20:15 -0700, wrote:
>
> >
> >JP Roberts wrote:
> >> > You complaining about anyone else's posting is funny.
> >> >
> >> > E.P.
> >> >
> >>
> >> It's the contents that matter to me, my friend.
> >
> >There is a saying: "It's not what you say, it's how you say it."
>
> Do you have a problem with people in real life who have different
> accents to you? Do you ask them to speak in your accent?

[snip]

Since you have replied to each of my points *below* what I had written,
you proved my point quite nicely.

Thanks.

E.P.

Dennis W wrote:

> Where can I get a copy of newsgroup etiquette.

Search for it using Google. Use the parameter "top-posting". Also
"netiquette".

It'll explain why it's rude and lazy.

E.P.