If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ads |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 20:36:21 -0400, Jules
> wrote: >Perhaps it is a throwback to the old days. When downloads took so long, >the person forgot what was being said. So it was nice to have all laid >out in order, when you got back from the bathroom or what ever. I really >don't see it being easier to read bottom posting. But then I started >reading both ways. In fact when I think about it, I like quoted >references underneath, kinda like a footnote. Like everything else, >primacy rules. Meaning what you learned the first time, is what you will >stick to. Good points, very well put. The demographics and usage patterns of the internet have changed massively over the years and this is due in large to the way the technology is changed. Years ago, people would be on dial-up and would access usenet once or twice a day. Trimming was much more important then. Now that people can dip into usenet far more often for shorter times, a much chattier style of post has emerged - posts that often contain only a single point. These posts do not require context quoting, hence top-posting makes the most sense. Times have changed, that's all. andyt |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:40:13 +0200, Arne > wrote:
>Once upon a time *Dave LaCourse* wrote: > >> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 14:34:20 +0000 (UTC), Andy Turner >> > wrote: >> >>>Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor >>>netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and >>>gets on with it. >> >> Times have NOT changed. Noticed I clipped all of your message and >> mine simply to reply to what is relevent. Go to other newsgroups and >> you will find a majority of the people do NOT top post. >> >> I agree with your estimation of quote after quote after quote. That >> too is impolite. Simply quote what you wish to talk about. Very >> simple. I bet you could do it without even trying. d;o) >> > >Little guideness (also in my sig): >http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post These are only someone's opinions put down in HTML. Bear this in mind. andyt |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Once upon a time *Andy Turner* wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:40:13 +0200, Arne > wrote: > >>Once upon a time *Dave LaCourse* wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 14:34:20 +0000 (UTC), Andy Turner >>> > wrote: >>> >>>>Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor >>>>netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and >>>>gets on with it. >>> >>> Times have NOT changed. Noticed I clipped all of your message and >>> mine simply to reply to what is relevent. Go to other newsgroups and >>> you will find a majority of the people do NOT top post. >>> >>> I agree with your estimation of quote after quote after quote. That >>> too is impolite. Simply quote what you wish to talk about. Very >>> simple. I bet you could do it without even trying. d;o) >>> >> >>Little guideness (also in my sig): >>http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post > > These are only someone's opinions put down in HTML. Bear this in mind. > > Supported by a large majority of posters in the groups I participate in. -- /Arne Top posters will be ignored. Quote the part you are replying to, no more and no less! And don't quote signatures, thank you. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 16:01:28 +0200, Arne > wrote:
>Once upon a time *Andy Turner* wrote: > >> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:40:13 +0200, Arne > wrote: >> >>>Little guideness (also in my sig): >>>http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post >> >> These are only someone's opinions put down in HTML. Bear this in mind. >> > >Supported by a large majority of posters in the groups I participate in. Majority preference doesn't make minority preferences invalid or incorrect - and it would be ludicrous to think that majority preferences should be stamped out just because they are a minority. Think about how that would translate to real life - it would seem ridiculous would it not? andyt |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Jules wrote: > EP > > This is different, than your escalated situations. Only as a matter of degree, not type. Some folks have preferences for chewing with their mouth open, or passing gas in public. If anything is acceptable, everything is acceptable. > I hope you find a newsgrope that still posts to your liking. Perhaps > join in one of those societies that does historic recreations. Or > society for creative anachronisms? Actually, most posts in most newsgroups are still posted correctly. Top-posters are yet a small minority. > Etiquette is making someone feel comfortable, but it does have > standards. Not pushing standards on people. Wrong. Folks who are deliberately rude often find themselves on the outside looking in. Post OT, all in caps, binaries, etc, and you find yourself killfiled or your account TOS-terminated in short order. > Try and get some joy out of life. Amusingly ironic. > Top post, bottom post, there seems to be a logic in having the most > recent comment at the top. The very same logic that says things should be read from bottom to top. Newsgroups aren't threaded from newest to oldest, at least not in any newsreader I've seen. Even so, most newsreaders will display posts with the newest content, then thread them by first to last post. Top-down. > React how you want. But I wouldn't do what you do. Post correctly? Of course not. After all, whatever *you* want is the only important thing. E.P. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Andy Turner wrote: > On 9 Apr 2005 08:57:18 -0700, wrote: > There are probably thousands. But you get the point. > > The only point I see is that you just *cannot* bring yourself to > appreciate that top-posting is a preferred and welcomed style by > thousands upon thousands of people. I see it just fine. They are in a small minority, and are generally repudiated. > Your analogies are always wrong > because they are with practices which are either dangerous or entirely > unaccepted. Heh. Driving the speed limit in the passing lane is not inherently dangerous, and is not illegal everywhere. Posting in caps or html might run afoul of some newsgroup charters, but in alt.* groups, most anything goes. That does not imply that those behaviors are not rude. It's merely a matter of degree. > Y'see those are not driving styles that are perfectly > accepted and welcomed by loads of other people. LOL. You have just abdicated the argument. Those behaviors are on display every day, by hundreds of people. And that's just in this area. In big cities, you'll see multiples of the same rude driving behavior. > However top-posting > *is* perfectly accepted and welcomed by thousands of people. People still claim the world is flat, that the moon landings were faked, and that the Earth is 6000 years old. Doesn't make them any less wrong for holding sincerely onto their false beliefs. > If you want to compare top-posting to something else, then you have to > compare it to something which is also preferred by a great many people > - such as motorbikes versus cars. Riding a motorbike (the mere act of riding) has never been considered rude behavior. Your analogy fails miserably. Grasp another straw. > >Unlike you, I support courtesy. You support "if it feels good, do it - > >to hell with the rest of you." > > Again, wrong. You do not support courtesy because you expect other > people to adopt your preferences. It's selfish and it's ignorant. If they were merely *my* preferences, you'd have a point. But they were standards of behavior set long before your or I ever wrote our first usenet posts. > >> Since you (presumably) drive an Audi, do you expect that everyone > >> drives one since that is your preference? > > > >Have I ever said that? > > No, it was a question <doh>. An attempt at a strawman construction. As are the rest of the "questions." Again, these standards exist separate of me. The majority holds them as correct. > However, I think you're perhaps getting the point. To make such > requests based on your own preferences would be ridiculous. If proper posting were merely my own preference, you'd be entirely correct. But it is not. It is the preference of the majority, and existed previous to MS Outlook and other wrongly-top-post-default programs. > I'm glad > to see that in at least some walks of life, you're happy to accept the > choices other people make and don't expect them to make the same > choices as you. In matters of ettiquette, I *do* expect people to make the same choices. That's how a community gets along. I don't clog the passing lane, and I expect my fellow drivers to do the same. I use center turn lanes, don't swing wide to turn right, don't left turn into the far right lane, and all sorts of other driving behavior that helps everyone (including me) get where they are going with the least amount of hassle. > >It speaks volumes that you are running around a.a.a > > Running around?! LOL! A figure of speech. Finding all of my posts and humping them to pound your chest. > > humping my posts trying to goad me into a flamewar. > > This is not about a flamewar (have I flamed you *at all*?) Sure, if name-calling or other ad hominem commentary can be called flaming. > this is > merely trying to help you adjust your self-centered attitude with > regard to expecting everyone else to adopt your preferences. Again, they are not merely *my* preferences. > > > Find another hobby. > > I would suggest the same WRT your top-post whining. If you hadn't > decided to start moaning about it, I wouldn't be responding now would > I.. So, you can't control your own posting. Sad. E.P. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Andy Turner wrote: > On 8 Apr 2005 13:01:37 -0700, wrote: > > > > >Ronny wrote: > >> "charles blassberg" > wrote in message > >> ... > >> > Can we pls keep on topic within a thread? > >> > >> This is usenet, offtopic is part of the fun time, get used to it. > > > >And what's even more humorous is that the meta-discussion couldn't just > >reside in the original thread - no, perish the thought - it had to > >spawn TWO new threads, including this one! On-topic, LOL. > > > >Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries. > >After all, any preference is valid, right? > > If a preference works for a great many people (as top-posting does), > then it must be valid. Then driving the speed limit in the passing lane is valid. As is almost universal cell phone use in public. > I don't see thousands of people posting in > all-caps. Your analogy therefore is not valid. It's a preference, isn't it? Just a matter of degree. > Do you think all usenet posts should be in English, since that is your > preferred language? In groups that are customarily English, yes. But I do see your strawman attempt. E.P. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Newsgroup Recommendation Requested | Tom Pabst | Simulators | 1 | February 10th 05 03:03 PM |
Note: The AOL Newsgroup service will be discontinued in early 2005. | SELECT TRA | VW water cooled | 1 | January 24th 05 04:52 AM |
Newsgroup FAQ? | [email protected] | Chrysler | 2 | December 20th 04 12:01 AM |
Newsgroup settings | Paris | Alfa Romeo | 1 | November 17th 04 02:58 PM |