OT: top-posting

[Jurvis LaSalle]

On Dec 3, 2004, at 11:23 AM, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote:

> so I reply the way I prefer to read replies.
<snip>
>  I have nothing against those
> who display the opposite preference by not top-posting, but I currently
> believe that one should not think any less of those who reply in any
> manner seen as less preferable.
<snip>

> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:47:59 -0500, Jurvis LaSalle wrote:
>
>> George,
>>
>> 	It's nice to see someone who refers to himself as a "noob" *not*
>> top-post (unlike some of the other helpful responses).

There have been many previous rants on this topic (just google it) and 
most contain more compelling arguments than "that's the way I like it." 
   As with most *nix and "hacker culture" practices that seem odd at 
first, there are good reasons for doing so that may not be evident in 
the short term.  While I use top-posting extensively in my private 
correspondence due to it being solely a two-way conversation, I use 
bottom-posting on mailing lists in an attempt to make each reply just 
that, the next reply in a group conversation.  When combined with 
concise "snipping," each post in the thread continues the flow of the 
discussion.
	Of course I am very biased, but when reflecting on the format of this 
email, I cringe at having to start in the middle, read up and then read 
down.  If we all just snipped and bottom-posted, the archive would be a 
better place.  Oh yeah, don't forget the resulting world peace, love 
and happiness too :-P !

Jurvis LaSalle