Is it just me, or do people here really don't know what "top-posting" is and why its frowned upon?
Sameer.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sameer D. Sahasrabuddhe" sameerds@it.iitb.ac.in To: "ILUG-Bom" linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 9:38 AM Subject: [ILUG-BOM] top-posting
Is it just me, or do people here really don't know what "top-posting" is and why its frowned upon?
I think TopPosting is too common in emails in general. That is why it does not bother people. In general, top posting is avoided where you want to put a reply which is connected to a specific part of the message or a specific point on the message which you want to respond to. That enables you to ensure that the reader does not confuse your reply with an unwanted part of the message.
Top Posting, per se, (I believe) is not a bad idea, specially when the mail has only one point or topic. But ofcourse, in a mailing list, it would then be necessary to delete all un-necessary parts of the quoted text
Personally, I have no problems with top posting, in fact, I think it is a better way of replying in most cases.
Regards Saswata
On Sun, 30 Mar 2003, Saswata Banerjee & Associates spake thusly:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sameer D. Sahasrabuddhe" sameerds@it.iitb.ac.in To: "ILUG-Bom" linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 9:38 AM Subject: [ILUG-BOM] top-posting
Is it just me, or do people here really don't know what "top-posting" is and why its frowned upon?
I think TopPosting is too common in emails in general. That is why it does not bother people.
IMHO, TopPosting is the bane of webmail. Of a non-introduction to a good email client.
Because I have written emails for ages and not top posted generally. But I find myself top-post invariably when I meet the mess that are most webmail systems.
q u a s i wrote:
On Sun, 30 Mar 2003, Saswata Banerjee & Associates spake thusly:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sameer D. Sahasrabuddhe" sameerds@it.iitb.ac.in To: "ILUG-Bom" linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 9:38 AM Subject: [ILUG-BOM] top-posting
Is it just me, or do people here really don't know what "top-posting" is and why its frowned upon?
I think TopPosting is too common in emails in general. That is why it does not bother people.
IMHO, TopPosting is the bane of webmail. Of a non-introduction to a good email client.
Also I think the Netscape mail client was partly responsible for this. Basically the whole www/aol/.com counterculture.
-Manish
Saswata wrote:
Top Posting, per se, (I believe) is not a bad idea, specially when the
has only one point or topic. But ofcourse, in a mailing list, it would
then
be necessary to delete all un-necessary parts of the quoted text
*chop*
IMHO, top posting is a disease! However, top-posting is acceptable to many people because they have traditional sets of experiences where every official letter begets another one in reply.
But when one uses e-mail, it is easy to forget the basic fact regarding electronic text. Electronic text is editable! So it is not only logical but actually helpful to tuck in replies at the appropriate place. This accelerates comprehension. Another added benefit is that it becomes even more easy to have a look at the gist of the entire discussion.
Warm regards,
Amol Hatwar.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Amol Hatwar" rollacosta@phreaker.net To: linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 1:43 PM Subject: Re: [ILUG-BOM] top-posting
Saswata wrote:
Top Posting, per se, (I believe) is not a bad idea, specially when the
has only one point or topic. But ofcourse, in a mailing list, it would
then
be necessary to delete all un-necessary parts of the quoted text
*chop*
IMHO, top posting is a disease! However, top-posting is acceptable to many people because they have traditional sets of experiences where every official letter begets another one in reply.
But when one uses e-mail, it is easy to forget the basic fact regarding electronic text. Electronic text is editable! So it is not only logical
but
actually helpful to tuck in replies at the appropriate place. This accelerates comprehension. Another added benefit is that it becomes even more easy to have a look at the gist of the entire discussion.
Amol, The problem which I face, and I know a large number of others who do so too, is that if mails are not top-posted, in many cases, we have to actually search, peek and poke through the mail to find what new comments have been added. I suspect many of us have in fact missed a few important ideas in mails not top-posted.
I do try not to top post mails on ILUG, because most people here dont want it that way. But I still prefer top posted mails in most cases. I use "Interleaved" replies when I want to make a point to point reply. Else, I simply top post and then delete all things not required in the original mail.
regards Saswata
On Apr 2, 2003 at 00:13, Saswata Banerjee & Associates wrote:
The problem which I face, and I know a large number of others who do so too, is that if mails are not top-posted, in many cases, we have to actually search, peek and poke through the mail to find what new comments have been added. I suspect many of us have in fact missed a few important ideas in mails not top-posted.
Not if people would use the standard convention of the indent character '>'. People these days don't seem to do that. I saw on post elsewhere where the person who replied had not quoted the original in any way, but his own text was prefixed with '>'.
I do try not to top post mails on ILUG, because most people here dont want it that way. But I still prefer top posted mails in most cases. I use "Interleaved" replies when I want to make a point to point reply.
So you're basically doing what I'm doing in this post.
Else, I simply top post and then delete all things not required in the original mail.
It's usually called "reply without including original in reply". :-)
-
Amol Hatwar -
Manish Jethani -
q u a s i -
Sameer D. Sahasrabuddhe -
Saswata Banerjee & Associates -
Satya