> -----Original Message-----
> From: jon@dakota-truck.net
>
> "Andy Levy" <andy.levy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 3, 2008 12:59 PM, Phillip Batson <pbatson68@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I like the replies on the top. If you are following a thread, then
> >> the response is right here, and you don't have to scroll down
> >> through all the other stuff you have already read.
>
> > That's why you're supposed to snip the stuff you aren't replying to.
>
>
> >> And if you haven't read it or need to catch up, then you can scroll
> >> down and read it.
>
> > Except you have to read backwards. Post 2 is ABOVE post 1, so you
> > have to scroll to the bottom, read post 1, then scroll up to read
> > post 2 (which may involve scrolling back down depending upon the
> > length), and so on.
>
>
>
> Agreed. I'm not even sure why there is any question about the
> matter. If you are of the scientific bent and require proof and
> facts, there are reams of data out there showing that bottom posting
> and proper quoting is infinitely superior to top posting. (Do a google
> search.) Beyond that, I'm not even sure how top posting came into
> being - it goes against thousands of years of written tradition and
> just feels completely un-natural. I will go so far as to say that if
> top posting feels "right" to someone, that person may very well be
> suffering from some sort of chemical imbalance. ;-)
>
> About the only pseudo-valid reason I can think of for top posting
> is plain ol' laziness. "I won't bother to reply point by point, and I
> don't care that this makes it difficult for anyone else to follow or
> reply, I'll just puke this reply up here and hit send."
>
> In all seriousness, if a message is worth replying to, its worth
> doing right. When considering a reply to a message, if it seems to
> you like its not worth it to quote the relevant parts and address the
> points brought up individually, but just doing a quick top-post is
> probably worthwhile, then I submit to you that the message is not
> worth replying to in the first place. In this case, compared to a top
> post, silence is golden. :-)
> -Jon-
Well said Jon....and about what I expected. I have been known to reply both
ways, depending upon the topic and the issues raised. I will admit to
being lazy at times. I will also admit that at times it seems expedient to
me to reply at the top when there is only one question needing an answer. I
assume, perhaps incorrectly, that anyone interested in the topic has been
paying attention.
As a participant in many email conversations with about 30 correspondents,
mostly racers of various backgrounds, top posting is the preferred method of
communicating. No one seems to have a problem with scrolling down to find
previous information if they haven't been following closely. Maybe its
because we're racers, maybe its because we find this method more expedient,
I don't know. Call me lazy or whatever, but I find either method equally
acceptable. LOL
Ray
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 01 2008 - 01:11:51 EST