Bottom Posting - Mozilla

This is a discussion on Bottom Posting - Mozilla ; Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol. By using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read. -- FrankO...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 177

Thread: Bottom Posting

  1. Bottom Posting

    Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol. By
    using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.

    --
    FrankO



  2. Re: Bottom Posting

    Frank Parmelee wrote:
    > Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol. By
    > using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.
    >


    sorry, but bottom posting is requested [and the norm] within these
    newsgroups: http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html

    --
    Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
    http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
    http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/46347-Pe...amus_Show.html
    http://www.toonarific.com/show.php?s...h&show_id=2778

    Please do not email me for help. Reply to the newsgroup only. Thanks

  3. Re: Bottom Posting

    Frank Parmelee wrote:
    > Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol. By
    > using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.
    >



    Convention in this group is as follows

    Top-posting vs bottom-posting.

    Some people like to put reply after the quoted text, some like it
    the other way around, and still some prefer interspersed style. Debates
    about which posting style is better have led to many flame wars in the
    forums. To keep forum discussion friendly, please do interspersion with
    trimming (see above for trimming rules). For a simple reply, this is
    equivalent bottom-posting. So, remove extraneous material, and place
    your comments in logical order, after the text you are commenting upon.
    The only exceptions are the accessibility forums, which are top-posting.


    See
    http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html

  4. Re: Bottom Posting

    In any other newsgroup but this one, top posting is convention or the norm
    making for smoother [easier reading] thread flow. I find it very difficult
    to sift through this newsgroup for information because of the insistence on
    bottom posting. I just thought you might want to join the real world, that's
    all.
    --
    FrankO


    "Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo"
    wrote in message news:bMGdnV07XJ4MXXnYnZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d@mozilla.org. ..
    > Frank Parmelee wrote:
    >> Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol. By
    >> using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.
    >>

    >
    > sorry, but bottom posting is requested [and the norm] within these
    > newsgroups: http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html
    >
    > --
    > Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
    > http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
    > http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/46347-Pe...amus_Show.html
    > http://www.toonarific.com/show.php?s...h&show_id=2778
    >
    > Please do not email me for help. Reply to the newsgroup only. Thanks




  5. Re: Bottom Posting

    Frank Parmelee wrote:
    > In any other newsgroup but this one, top posting is convention or the norm
    > making for smoother [easier reading] thread flow. I find it very difficult
    > to sift through this newsgroup for information because of the insistence on
    > bottom posting. I just thought you might want to join the real world, that's
    > all.



    Please read the mozilla etiquette page for this
    http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html

  6. Re: Bottom Posting

    Frank Parmelee wrote:
    > In any other newsgroup but this one, top posting is convention or the
    > norm


    in every group I've been in its bottom posting.

    > making for smoother [easier reading] thread flow. I find it very
    > difficult to sift through this newsgroup for information because of
    > the insistence on bottom posting.


    my heart bleeds for you

    > I just thought you might want to
    > join the real world, that's all.


    the real world within these newsgroups is bottom or interspersion posting.

    --
    Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
    http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
    http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/46347-Pe...amus_Show.html
    http://www.toonarific.com/show.php?s...h&show_id=2778

    Please do not email me for help. Reply to the newsgroup only. Thanks

  7. Re: Bottom Posting

    On 2007-02-27 15:55 (-0700 UTC), Frank Parmelee wrote:

    > Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol. By
    > using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.


    Bottom-posting has been a convention for much longer than top-posting.

    While top-posting has /largely/ become the convention in e-mail,
    bottom-posting and inter-leaved responses are both more logical and easier
    to follow than top-posting could ever hope to be.

    That said, both are really only functional if appropriate ing occurs.

    /b.

    --
    String quartets don't march very well.
    --Donald Barthelme, /The Dead Father/

  8. Re: Bottom Posting

    On 2007-02-27 16:46 (-0700 UTC), Frank Parmelee wrote:

    > In any other newsgroup but this one, top posting is convention or the norm
    > making for smoother [easier reading] thread flow. I find it very difficult
    > to sift through this newsgroup for information because of the insistence on
    > bottom posting. I just thought you might want to join the real world, that's
    > all.


    Umm . . . and in which part of the real world does one place a sig with
    compliant sig delimiter *before* the quoted material?

    /b.

    --
    String quartets don't march very well.
    --Donald Barthelme, /The Dead Father/

  9. Re: Bottom Posting

    On 27.02.2007 16:55, Frank Parmelee wrote:

    --- Original Message ---

    > Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol. By
    > using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.
    >


    Oooo boyyyy, here we go AGAIN !!! :-(

    --
    Jay Garcia Netscape/Mozilla Champion
    UFAQ - http://www.UFAQ.org

  10. Re: Bottom Posting

    Frank Parmelee wrote:
    > Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol. By
    > using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.
    >

    Do you normally read from bottom up? I disagree about top posting being
    easier to read.
    In any case, the convention in THIS group is bottom posting, and going
    against the convention won't make you popular.


    --
    Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net

  11. Re: Bottom Posting

    Frank Parmelee wrote:
    > In any other newsgroup but this one, top posting is convention or the norm
    > making for smoother [easier reading] thread flow. I find it very difficult
    > to sift through this newsgroup for information because of the insistence on
    > bottom posting. I just thought you might want to join the real world, that's
    > all.


    thanks, but no thanks. We have been getting along just fine before you
    came, and will continue long after you are gone, I am sure.
    Forgive us if we don't adjust our posting style to fit your preferences.


    --
    Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net

  12. Re: Bottom Posting

    Frank Parmelee wrote:

    > In any other newsgroup but this one, top posting is convention or the norm


    As they say in rougher circles: bull****.


    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html


  13. Re: Bottom Posting

    Ron Hunter wrote:
    > Frank Parmelee wrote:
    >> Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol.
    >> By using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.
    >>

    > Do you normally read from bottom up? I disagree about top posting being
    > easier to read.
    > In any case, the convention in THIS group is bottom posting, and going
    > against the convention won't make you popular.
    >
    >



    I always thought it was "When in Rome......."

  14. Re: Bottom Posting

    On 2/27/2007 3:46 PM Frank Parmelee opined:

    > In any other newsgroup but this one, top posting is convention or the norm
    > making for smoother [easier reading] thread flow. I find it very difficult
    > to sift through this newsgroup for information because of the insistence on
    > bottom posting. I just thought you might want to join the real world, that's
    > all.


    per another person obviously more intuned than your goodself:


    "If you 'study' the effect of top posting, you make some important
    discoveries.

    Top posters generally or typically [meaning usually but not always]
    "don't know what they are talking about".

    It is actually a very serious affliction. They don't read carefully
    what they are replying to, as if they are in some kind of peculiar fog.

    It is as if they are 'glancing at' the post which they have decided to
    respond to -- and having glanced, they develop a 'notion' about
    something that has some kind of distant relationship to the post they
    are replying.

    But, they don't actually reply to the post they are replying -- that's
    why they 'choose' to top post -- because in the 'back of their mind'
    they know that they don't actually know what [where 'what' means what
    the other person said that they are pretending to talk about] they are
    talking about and that they actually /aren't/ really talking about what
    they are pretending to talk about. They are talking about something
    else kin to what they are claiming to talk about by hiding what they
    claim to be talking about way down underneath there.

    Further -- the top poster is full of ego-centricity. There is a
    subliminal reason that they are putting their post up there on top and
    there is a subliminal reason they are choosing to disregard the actual
    words of the post they are responding. That is because they
    subliminally have no respect for anyone else who is communicating in the
    thread compared to their own sense of self-importance.

    The top poster is saying "Some other things have been said before, but
    now * I * have spoken. And now that I have spoken, nothing else is
    really important any more." "


  15. Re: Bottom Posting

    On Or About Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:55:50 -0500, Without Any Hesitation
    Or Thinking Twice, Frank Parmelee Stumbled Over To The Keyboard And
    wrote The Following In The mozilla.support.firefox News Group:

    > Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol. By
    > using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.


    ROTFLMAO
    --
    Just West Of Nowhere
    Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
    http://.www.NuBoy-Industries.Com
    2/27/2007 9:47:40 PM CST

  16. Re: Bottom Posting

    On 2007-02-27 17:52 (-0700 UTC), Jay Garcia wrote:

    > On 27.02.2007 16:55, Frank Parmelee wrote:
    >
    > --- Original Message ---
    >
    >> Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol. By
    >> using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.

    >
    > Oooo boyyyy, here we go AGAIN !!! :-(


    Oh, come now, Jay, surely this is very old hat to you by now. . . .

    :-D

    /b.

    --
    String quartets don't march very well.
    --Donald Barthelme, /The Dead Father/

  17. Re: Bottom Posting

    /Frank Parmelee/ said:

    > Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol.
    > By using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.


    This topic returns with regularity, like vanquished mold. Actually, the
    norm was once bottom posting.

    It's a long-standing UseNet convention, which has been encouraged
    here, with minimal snipping, so a thread can be read in its entirety,
    and chronologically, without resorting to references, some of which
    may have expired. Multiple replies lend themselves to logical,
    top-to-bottom reading, whereas top-posting might be best for
    threads that have only one reply, such as in a mail message.

    Press to quickly scroll to the bottom. Replies can be
    automatically bottom-posted by a simple setting.

    Granted, it's not perfect, and there may be occasional line-wrapping
    problems when threads are lengthy, but a intelligibility comparison
    between groups will quickly reveal the wisdom bottom-posting.
    For example, compare threads here and similar discussion in ...
    news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...dowsXP.general

    In any case, one should stick with the convention of the group, and be
    consistent in the mode that is used.

  18. Re: Bottom Posting

    On 27.02.2007 20:56, goodwin wrote:

    --- Original Message ---

    > On 2/27/2007 3:46 PM Frank Parmelee opined:
    >
    >> In any other newsgroup but this one, top posting is convention or the norm
    >> making for smoother [easier reading] thread flow. I find it very difficult
    >> to sift through this newsgroup for information because of the insistence on
    >> bottom posting. I just thought you might want to join the real world, that's
    >> all.

    >
    > per another person obviously more intuned than your goodself:
    >
    >
    > "If you 'study' the effect of top posting, you make some important
    > discoveries.
    >
    > Top posters generally or typically [meaning usually but not always]
    > "don't know what they are talking about".
    >
    > It is actually a very serious affliction. They don't read carefully
    > what they are replying to, as if they are in some kind of peculiar fog.
    >
    > It is as if they are 'glancing at' the post which they have decided to
    > respond to -- and having glanced, they develop a 'notion' about
    > something that has some kind of distant relationship to the post they
    > are replying.
    >
    > But, they don't actually reply to the post they are replying -- that's
    > why they 'choose' to top post -- because in the 'back of their mind'
    > they know that they don't actually know what [where 'what' means what
    > the other person said that they are pretending to talk about] they are
    > talking about and that they actually /aren't/ really talking about what
    > they are pretending to talk about. They are talking about something
    > else kin to what they are claiming to talk about by hiding what they
    > claim to be talking about way down underneath there.
    >
    > Further -- the top poster is full of ego-centricity. There is a
    > subliminal reason that they are putting their post up there on top and
    > there is a subliminal reason they are choosing to disregard the actual
    > words of the post they are responding. That is because they
    > subliminally have no respect for anyone else who is communicating in the
    > thread compared to their own sense of self-importance.
    >
    > The top poster is saying "Some other things have been said before, but
    > now * I * have spoken. And now that I have spoken, nothing else is
    > really important any more." "
    >


    Classic !! Thanks.

    --
    Jay Garcia Netscape/Mozilla Champion
    UFAQ - http://www.UFAQ.org

  19. Re: Bottom Posting

    hb wrote, on 28. feb 2007 05:04:

    >> Would everyone please follow convention and use top-posting protocol.
    >> By using top-posting protocol, thread flow is much easier to read.


    [...]

    > Press to quickly scroll to the bottom. Replies can be
    > automatically bottom-posted by a simple setting.



    Actually, though a nominal bottom-poster I find this more annoying than
    pure top posting. At the end of a long thread, havine scrolled through
    the lot of it, one gets a load of blurb pertaining to bits one can't find.

    The best is replying to points that are made under those points and
    scrapping the rest, as is the habit on cultivated MLs.

    > Granted, it's not perfect, and there may be occasional line-wrapping
    > problems when threads are lengthy, but a intelligibility comparison
    > between groups will quickly reveal the wisdom bottom-posting.
    > For example, compare threads here and similar discussion in ...
    > news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...dowsXP.general
    >
    > In any case, one should stick with the convention of the group, and be
    > consistent in the mode that is used.


    Personally I find the "convention of the group" decidedly uncultivated
    when insisting on people reading reams and reams of stuff irrelevant to
    the point being made.

    --Tonni

    --
    Tonni Earnshaw
    email: tonni dot at dot hetnet dot nl
    throwaway spamtrap address: nieuwveen-1@hetnet.nl

  20. Re: Bottom Posting

    hb wrote:
    > For example, compare threads here and similar discussion in ...
    > news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...dowsXP.general


    threads in those groups are strange. The experts there will top post
    and have their sig file delimiter below that and the replied to message
    below that. Now when one replies the entire message below the sig
    delimiter is deleted.


    --
    Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
    http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
    http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/46347-Pe...amus_Show.html
    http://www.toonarific.com/show.php?s...h&show_id=2778

    Please do not email me for help. Reply to the newsgroup only. Thanks

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 ... LastLast