From: Mark Wilden <mark@...>
Date: 2008-05-28T04:11:19+09:00
Subject: Re: Top-posting

On May 27, 2008, at 11:50 AM, Phillip Gawlowski wrote:

> | I've already read what's been quoted ...
>
> That's good for you. But 6 billion people aren't you. Do you apply  
> your
> standards to everybody? Assumptions that work for you do not work for
> everybody.

I'm talking about how my mind works, and why I feel the way I do. I  
think it's logical. If you think my statements aren't logical, please  
say so. For example, you may think that when you read a post here, you  
do not actually remember the previous post in the thread. I doubt that  
very much, but it's possible.

Also, remember that I'm not prescribing anything (I've made that clear  
several times). Unlike the anti-toppers, I'm not telling people what  
to do. I wish people would trim quotes. I wish people would not  
declare something a 'standard' that is clearly not. Other than that, I  
don't much care.

> A crude example: Do you speak Chinese, where everybody else speaks
> German, while insisting that the language doesn't matter, it's all  
> words
> anyway?

"Everybody" doesn't think top-posting is an issue. Nor does  
"everybody" consider bottom-posting a "standard." And I really don't  
know what you're analogizing to with the phrase "it's all words  
anyway". Is anyone here saying anything remotely like that?

> |> Just top posting might (*might*) be acceptable in a business/one- 
> on-one
> |> conversation, but is considered rude otherwise
> |
> | Begging the question.

My understanding of the term is where you argue about something in  
terms that presuppose the issue has already been decided. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question 
  . But I'll amend my criticism to "bare assertion." :) Also, it's  
very tricky to use the passive voice in this context. "Is considered  
rude" by whom? That's one of the cruxes of this discussion.

///ark