From: darren kirby <bulliver@...>
Date: 2006-09-03T05:03:16+09:00
Subject: Re: Off topic: What is "top posting" ??

--nextPart1208647.iKhK9vtbgH
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

quoth the William Crawford:

> Now, everyone keeps going on about 'if you want an answer, you'll have
> to post in a certain way'.  This is not true.  I have not seen 1 post on
> here that failed to get an answer because someone top-posted.  I've seen
> plenty of 'don't top post' replies, but the majority of them were tagged
> onto an answer.  If changing the format of your post doesn't change the
> answer, how is the 'wrong way' ineffective?

=46WIW I am subscribed to around 20 different mailing lists. Some are usene=
t=20
gateways and some are not. The one common thread they all have, is that as=
=20
you mention, a hapless top-poster will soon be chastised and told to not do=
=20
so again. What this means to me is that the issue is beyond a stalemate, as=
=20
you put it in another message, and beyond this specific lists 'rules', but=
=20
rather, as The Way Things Should Be Done (tm) on a mailing list or usenet.

Regardless of whether or not your hypothetical top-poster may get a respons=
e,=20
it seems to me good form to use the medium in the manner that most expect y=
ou=20
to. When in Rome ans all...

Wasn't there a RFC or a usenet 'netiquette' document or something which spe=
aks=20
to this issue?

=2Dd
=2D-=20
darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org
"...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..."
=2D Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972

--nextPart1208647.iKhK9vtbgH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBE+eNOwPD5Cr/3CJgRAvkwAJ4pvMFLHmatEjJ15doh/s4/Og4gbgCgk29/
x5g7xtZUYeChGMg0YTcfH1k=
=eRfJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1208647.iKhK9vtbgH--