Posted by Russell Campbell on 08/31/06 00:47

Again, it just comes down to your opinion. Sure, people can ignore my
posts. If they do that then I'm not bothered. The Internet is a big place
with lots of people willing to help out instead of just arguing over
something like this. What bothers me is that someone jumped on me for top
posting in a very short post. One other person who chimed in posted a link
to try to justify his opinion and in that very link it said on short
messages it really doesn't matter, so his attempts to justify his opinion
actually supported the fact that he should have just kept quiet. And then
another person chmied in with a condescending and snotty response. Call me
crazy, but it seems that if he wants to win people over to his way of seeing
things that it might be a bad idea to start off by insulting them. His
response was to insult me again (or just a notification he was going to kill
filter me, depending on the meaning of his acronym). This person just comes
across as someone who starts off in an arrogant fashion and runs off pouting
when he doesn't get his way. Do you think I care if he is filtering me?
That guy had nothing intelligent to say. Your reply was thought out, at
least, and addressed my statements, though it did have a touch of an
attitude, also, with the "1 + 1" comment and the "try harder" comment.

I did use the word "Web" imprecisely. I should have type Internet. I also
used the word forum as a general term for a place where people can have a
community discussion. So I was talking about what the Internet brings us
and allow us to participate in and that takes many forms.

I've participated a good bit in newsgroups, though not as much these days
for various reasons. I've never had people jump on me for posting styles.
I've not jumped on them, either. To each his own (except in this NG where
it seems that if the people don't get their way, they won't talk to you).

"Chris F.A. Johnson" <cfajohnson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cplhs3-hok.ln1@xword.teksavvy.com...
> On 2006-08-30, Russell Campbell wrote:
>>
>> It's interesting how people want to dictate how you post because that's
>> the
>> way they post.
>
> It's interesting that people generally post in a sensible manner.
>
>> One thing I've noticed in many years on the Web is that there are
>> many preferences on this issue and it's kind of silly to try to make
>> people post the way you want them to.
>
> Usenet is *not* the Web.
>
>> Why is your way correct and mine not?
>
> Why does 1 plus 1 equal 2 and not 3?
>
>> In my experience, most people "top post",
>
> Not in Usenet, and not, in my experience in e-mail either, though
> unfortunately it is becomming more common.
>
>> but switch to "mixed posting" (to make up a term meaning
>> quote/reply/quote/reply etc.) when the original post is long and
>> contains many points (I do this sometimes).
>
> That makes sense. Put your reply after the relevant section.
>
>> In quite a number of different forums I find that top posting and
>> mixed posting are most prevelent, with "bottom posting" being used
>> (but IMHO it's the most irritating).
>
> Forums are not Usenet.
>
>> I think you have to allow for people to post the way they want to.
>
> Sure, if they want to be corrected or ignored.
>
>> It's irritating when people jump on this issue in such a small minor
>> post as this was. At least in a longer submission I could understand
>> the desire for mixed posting, but in this little thread they need
>> everything requoted?
>
> In Usenet, you have no idea whether the reader has even seen any
> previous posts, or whether they are available, or whether he
> remembers it, after poerhaps having read dozens (or even hundreds)
> of other posts before returning to the thread.
>
>> I sure don't understand why.
>
> Try harder.
>
>> Really . . . you can't dictate people's styles. Sorry if you don't
>> like it, but I live with other people's posting styles and resist
>> lecturing, so why can't you (granted, you weren't the one that told
>> me how to post, but you did chime in). I do have to resist the
>> temptation to request a certain style when people bottom post. When
>> the orginal post was long, it's really irritating to have to
>> constantly scroll down to see the latest response, especially as it
>> gets copied with replies and the latest reply is way down the page.
>
> It helps to use a good newsreader. I just press tab to go directly
> to the new material, no matter how long the post is. Even without
> that, it's rare for more than two or three keystrokes to be
> required to get to the bottom.
>
>> An in e-mail, top posting is very, very common.
>
> It's getting that way, unfortunately.
>
>> The main thing is that I can remember what I said and I don't need
>> people to do the quote/reply thing.
>
> Perhaps you don't say very much? In a newsgroup, ythere may be
> many pespondents, not just you. It is much easier if one can read
> the replies chronologically.
>
>> I just want to get their response (but, as I mentioned, in long
>> postings or e-mails quote/reply is fine). Your preference for mixed
>> posting is fine, but trying to make people post a certain way is
>> really just a waste of time.
>
> Not posting logically is a waste of many more people's time.
>
> --
> Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
> ===================================================================
> Author:
> Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

[Back to original message]