RE: Top posting (Was: cell phone use in hospitals)

"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>> Standards are not set in concrete.
>
> True, but when presented with the standards that well over half post here
> with, you took the attitude of ,"f*** them all, I'll do what I want." Very
> poor etiquette and it shows a lack of consideration.

You're grossly mischaracterizing my position. As I've stated before,
when I reply to a post I'll use whatever convention is already in use
for that thread, eventhough I prefer top-posting.
When in Rome, do as the Romans...

--
John Richards

---

› See More: RE: Top posting (Was: cell phone use in hospitals)

"David S" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> P.P.S. To whoever it is who keeps mentioning fitting on one screen, not all
> screens are the same and the examples you are citing of fitting on one
> screen don't in my reader.

Yep, it's a judgment call. For me, the preview screen shows about 31 lines.
YMMV. If a post shows nothing but old quoted text for the first 31 lines, I'll
skip it and go on to the next. Life is too short to waste it by scrolling
Usenet posts.

--
John Richards

"John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Al Klein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 06:33:53 GMT, "John Richards"
> > <[email protected]> said in alt.cellular:
> >
> >>"Al Klein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >>> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 01:18:35 GMT, "John Richards"
> >>> <[email protected]> said in alt.cellular:
> >
> >>>>Take a look at the Microsoft newsgroups on the NNTP server
msnews.microsoft.com.
> >>>>More than 90% of the posts there are top-posted
> >
> >>> Good argument - against top posting.
> >
> >>Guess you missed reading the part where I said it was working out
> >>well for them, and that they're not clueless newbies.
> >
> > I saw it. If MS "sets a standard", that's a good reason to think that
> > there's at least one flaw with the "standard". Anything they set.
> > Just look at their "flavor of the week" OSs. Windows ME, anyone?
>
> Customers vote with their dollars. It may be 'cool' in certain circles to
> be anti-MS, but the fact remains that their OS is on 95% of all personal
> computers. As such, they are a force to be reckoned with, and can't be
> ignored.
>
Pretty ****ty analogy. Over 95% of cars run on gasoline- that doesn't make
the Saudis experts on motor vehicle regulations. Over 95% of the computers
in my community run on electricity provided by the local utility- that
doesn't make them experts on computer technology. Both are a force to be
reckoned with and can't be ignored.

Let's see if using your own analogy makes any sense to you- roughly 90% of
the people posting in this thread are telling you top posting is not the
accepted standard.

"John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>
> >> Standards are not set in concrete.
> >
> > True, but when presented with the standards that well over half post
here
> > with, you took the attitude of ,"f*** them all, I'll do what I want."
Very
> > poor etiquette and it shows a lack of consideration.
>
> You're grossly mischaracterizing my position. As I've stated before,
> when I reply to a post I'll use whatever convention is already in use
> for that thread, eventhough I prefer top-posting.
> When in Rome, do as the Romans...
>
> --
You know what, John- I'll give you that one. And looking at your posts
indicates that you have done just that. And for that you get an apology.

I hate having to scroll when bottom-posters do not snip the unimportant
parts of a posting...

"Steve B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I hate having to scroll when bottom-posters do not snip the unimportant
> parts of a posting...
>
>
Yep- almost as annoying as those that snip the whole post to lose all points
of reference.

Scott wrote "almost as annoying as those that snip the whole post to lose
all points of reference."

Unless of course, like me, one is expressing an opinion not related to
anything within the lines of text. The subject, in this case, is worded
adequately for understanding what this post is about. Would you agree?

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 17:32:11 GMT, "John Richards"
<[email protected]> said in alt.cellular:

>"Al Klein" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

>> I saw it. If MS "sets a standard", that's a good reason to think that
>> there's at least one flaw with the "standard". Anything they set.
>> Just look at their "flavor of the week" OSs. Windows ME, anyone?

>Customers vote with their dollars.

Customers buy computers. Those computers, due to coercive agreements
at one time, have a Windows OS. No customer "voted" to use a MS OS
until very recently, and then only a few knowledgeable customers.
Most people take what comes on the computer, and don't even know that
they have alternatives.

> It may be 'cool' in certain circles to
>be anti-MS, but the fact remains that their OS is on 95% of all personal
>computers. As such, they are a force to be reckoned with, and can't be
>ignored.

As an OS, yes. As apps, yes. That still doesn't make them a
standards committee.

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 04:33:35 GMT, David S
<[email protected]> said in alt.cellular:

>P.P.S. To whoever it is who keeps mentioning fitting on one screen, not all
>screens are the same and the examples you are citing of fitting on one
>screen don't in my reader.

It's not only the reader. You and I use the same one (albeit
different versions), but my screen resolution is 1280X800. YMMV.

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:06:53 GMT, "John Richards"
<[email protected]> said in alt.cellular:

>You're grossly mischaracterizing my position. As I've stated before,
>when I reply to a post I'll use whatever convention is already in use
>for that thread, eventhough I prefer top-posting.
>When in Rome, do as the Romans...

The majority of "Romans" bottom post.

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:26:23 GMT, "John Richards"
<[email protected]> said in alt.cellular:

>Yep, it's a judgment call. For me, the preview screen shows about 31 lines.
>YMMV. If a post shows nothing but old quoted text for the first 31 lines, I'll
>skip it and go on to the next. Life is too short to waste it by scrolling
>Usenet posts.

Very few news readers (if any) have "preview screens", unless you
count the topic as a preview.

In message <[email protected]> "Steve
B" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Unless of course, like me, one is expressing an opinion not related to
>anything within the lines of text. The subject, in this case, is worded
>adequately for understanding what this post is about. Would you agree?

No. In that case, start a new thread.


--
Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we.
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country
and our people, and neither do we.
-- George W. Bush 08/05/2004

In message <[email protected]> Al Klein
<[email protected]> wrote:

>>Yep, it's a judgment call. For me, the preview screen shows about 31 lines.
>>YMMV. If a post shows nothing but old quoted text for the first 31 lines, I'll
>>skip it and go on to the next. Life is too short to waste it by scrolling
>>Usenet posts.
>
>Very few news readers (if any) have "preview screens", unless you
>count the topic as a preview.

And some of those that do can be made to collapse quotes anyway, so you
get to see the new content right away, without breaking the discussion.


--
Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we.
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country
and our people, and neither do we.
-- George W. Bush 08/05/2004

"DevilsPGD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In message <[email protected]> Al Klein
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>Yep, it's a judgment call. For me, the preview screen shows about 31
>>>lines.
>>>YMMV. If a post shows nothing but old quoted text for the first 31 lines,
>>>I'll
>>>skip it and go on to the next. Life is too short to waste it by scrolling
>>>Usenet posts.
>>
>>Very few news readers (if any) have "preview screens", unless you
>>count the topic as a preview.
>
> And some of those that do can be made to collapse quotes anyway, so you
> get to see the new content right away, without breaking the discussion.
>
If the quotes are collapsed - what is the difference between top & bottom
posting?

In message <XsYjd.48630$_g6.31968@okepread03> "IMHO" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>> And some of those that do can be made to collapse quotes anyway, so you
>> get to see the new content right away, without breaking the discussion.
>>
>If the quotes are collapsed - what is the difference between top & bottom
>posting?

The flow of conversation is preserved. Personally, I don't use that
functionality myself, but it's an option.


--
Going to war over religion is fighting to see who's got the
better imaginary friend.