|
|
Posted by Rik Wasmus on 10/02/07 15:43
--
Rik Wasmus
It is not *my* way. It's the general concensus sparing a few individuals
who are arrogant anough to claim to know better.
> Once again, you are merely claiming that things should be *your* way.
Have you ever tried to read of bottom-up conversation when you have no
previous posts? It's not that easy to follow, at least not that quickly.
Scrolling to the new parts of a post (which many newsreaders do
automagically) however is simple. BTW: claiming something is kludgy in
Google Groups isn't an argument either. Complain to the people making that
horrendous interface.
> which is irrelevant as to whether top or bottom posting should be used.
>> Contrary to online
>> forums, usenet is not on a single server, but thousands of them. Wether
>> or
>> not other people seeing your reply to a group can see the original
>> message
>> you are replying to is not something you can rely on.
I still often reply with just an url of the manual.
> Or people
> were routinely told to RTFM.
What exactly has been changed about usenet in the mean time? By all means,
you're welcome to piss off, and just use online forums as your usenet <->
internet forums, horse <-> car equivalent. The practise of riding horses
(posting on usenet) hasn't changed, except for an eternal september.
> and once upon a time, people rode horses. Saying "it was always done that
> way" is not a valid argument.
>> It is quite arrogant to insist to know better then a usenet practise
>> that
>> has evolved en been followed for years and years.
> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 16:56:36 +0200, "Rik Wasmus"
> <luiheidsgoeroe@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:06:37 +0200, Mtr <Mtr@no.spam> wrote:
Ok, let's start with an example:
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|