Posted by user on 01/23/07 15:57

Well thank you.

I 'stopped' bottom posting quit some time ago. Reason, I took a lot more
to read bottom posts than top posts. As you state even at it's best
bottom posts suffer from people 'not' cutting.

I have never understood the bottom post argument of 'that's the way is
has always been' or 'that's the way it is'. Many bottom posting groups
have changed and with all the time some people spend trying to enforce
'their' ideas on others they could spend said time fixing the problem.

It really seems 'flat earth' mentality without being arrogant.



Tim Roberts wrote:

> user <someone@somewhere.org> wrote:
>
>>Jerry,
>>
>>Read posts and reply or don't. That is your decision.
>>
>>P.S. For you and Inkster. THE EARTH IS NOT FLAT!!! REALLY!! Any you
>>saying it is does not make it so!
>
>
> At the risk of beating a dead horse, I'd like to explore what you've said
> here.
>
> Most people top-post because Microsoft chose to write Outlook and Outlook
> Express with blatent (and perhaps intentional) disregard for the
> established patterns. Those people top-post because they are use the
> defaults without thinking and without knowing any better.
>
> You, on the other hand, seem to be making the argumeent that top-posting is
> somehow superior to bottom-posting. I've not heard that argument before,
> and I'd like to hear your reasons. Clearly, saying "I do it therefore it
> must be better" is nonsense, so you must have something better.
>
> Personally, I don't think it makes a bit of difference. Most people quote
> way, way, WAY too much as it is; thanks to threading newsreaders, all I
> need is the briefest reminder of what we were talking about for context.
> When you cut quoting to a minimum, the top/bottom thing becomes irrelevant.

[Back to original message]