RE: top posting

[Guest guest]

My humble contribution to this thread is a Buddhist saying :-)

" An excess of reason is itself a form of madness "

Dedy

[Guest guest]

Thank you, Dedy.

That's most intelligent bit to come out of all of this.

Enjoy! ;-)

Judith Alta

-----Original Message-----

From: Rundle [mailto:Dpdg@...]

My humble contribution to this thread is a Buddhist saying :-)

" An excess of reason is itself a form of madness "

Dedy

[Guest guest]

Speaking of all this, I signed up for this list to learn more about NT,

diet and food. There's a lot of OT stuff that gets posted and just clogs up

the in box. I've jumped in a few times in OT discussions but will try to

refrain from now on. And there are some people who just can't seem to quit

and go back and forth on tangents that seem to hold very little interest to

any other the ones arguing. If people want to continue OT discussions ad

naseum, I wish they would go off the board and email privately. I don't

want to leave this list as there are good questions and info being posted

but there seems to be way more OT stuff. I delete most of it unread but it

still takes up too much time to download and then delete. I doubt I'm the

only one who feels this way and I will try to make this my last OT post.

Thanks for bearing with me.

(who is new to NT and just wants to learn)

>Thank you, Dedy.

>

>That's most intelligent bit to come out of all of this.

>

>Enjoy! ;-)

>

>Judith Alta

[Guest guest]

WORD

Re: top posting

> My humble contribution to this thread is a Buddhist saying :-)

>

>

> " An excess of reason is itself a form of madness "

>

>

> Dedy

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

or

" Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts

can be counted. "

- Albert Einstein

(1879-1955)

Wanita

> My humble contribution to this thread is a Buddhist saying :-)

>

>

> " An excess of reason is itself a form of madness "

>

>

> Dedy

[Guest guest]

it's true - we have this conversation every three months or so too. last

time we had it, the majority preferred top posting. in fact, i changed my

whole email-writing style for it! and that's it, i'm not changing again,

darn it! next thing ya know, ya'll will be wanting me to use capital

letters or something...

katja

At 05:49 PM 7/1/2004, you wrote:

>And for me, having the reply at the top is easier to understand.

>Especially if you've been following the thread, you really don't

>want to re-read all the stuff, just want to jump in to the meat of

>the reply. Guess everyone has different personal preferences.

[Guest guest]

Okie dokie, I'll just post where I think it is the best place to

post! No problem! The most important thing is to keep the lines of

information flowing. Everyone certainly does a great job in that

department.

Carry on, :-)

Sheila

> > >And for me, having the reply at the top is easier to understand.

> > >Especially if you've been following the thread, you really don't

> > >want to re-read all the stuff, just want to jump in to the meat

of

> > >the reply. Guess everyone has different personal preferences.

[Guest guest]

>Oh, oh! I think I just top posted too, if that means on top of the

>previous message? Is that what it means? I haven't posted in ages and

>didn't realize this was a rule. I'm still learning. Sorry.

>

>Sheila

Actually I think we discussed this some time ago and never

came to a consensus. The world is divided into top and bottom

posters, just like it is divided between gram positive and gram negative

bacteria ... ;--)

-- Heidi Jean

[Guest guest]

>

> >Oh, oh! I think I just top posted too, if that means on top of the

> >previous message? Is that what it means? I haven't posted in ages

and

> >didn't realize this was a rule. I'm still learning. Sorry.

> >

> >Sheila

>

> Actually I think we discussed this some time ago and never

> came to a consensus. The world is divided into top and bottom

> posters, just like it is divided between gram positive and gram

negative

> bacteria ... ;--)

>

> -- Heidi Jean

I've noticed that it is also divided into those who don't quote

entire Digests and those who DO... just to add 5 lines! I guess the

simple art of cut & paste is incomprehensible to many. LOL Whats

worse, a digest quoter who topposts or a digest quoter who

bottomposts, or a digest quoter who quotes a digest quoter who

topposts? Now I'm dizzy..

Darrell

[Guest guest]

(slethnobotanist) posted a brilliant and detailed explanation

of list netiquette a while ago, and if he has it on hand should

repost it, since this has come up again.

I've never seen even a half-logical claim that top-posting is more

advantageous, or even that it *isn't* a more or less abominable way

to post (except in very short responses). While I imagine this

debate will get exhausting quickly, I'll make my argument as a simple

question.

Which of the following two paragraphs is more coherent?

1)Then on the way home I saw my friend Jay and invited him over for a

ham sandwich. I bought some ham and some bread. I went downtown to

browse the deli for something to eat. I was feeling hungry

yesterday, but I had nothing to eat in the fridge.

2)I was feeling hungry yesterday, but I had nothing to eat in the

fridge. I went downtown to browse the deli for something to eat. I

bought some ham and some bread. Then on the way home I saw my friend

Jay and invited him over for a ham sandwich.

Chris

[Guest guest]

> And for me, having the reply at the top is easier to understand.

> Especially if you've been following the thread, you really don't

> want to re-read all the stuff, just want to jump in to the meat of

> the reply. Guess everyone has different personal preferences.

If the post is properly edited, you shouldn't have to re-read

everything. It's often sufficient to simply quote a sentence from

someone, or in any case just the core necessary information that you

are replying to. It helps keep everything in context. If it's

obvious what's being referred to, you can scan right over the quoted

text, and if it isn't, you can refer back to it.

The worst thing about top-posting is having to reply to one and

copying and pasting the quoted text into the proper order. If the

thread requires the context be kept for proper understanding, it

becomes almost impossible to sort through a, say, 4th-generation

email that has been continually top posted, or worse, both top and

bottom-posted.

Chris

[Guest guest]

its probably a good idea for no one to change their

> posting preference to fit anyone else's or for no one to expect any

other to

> change specifically to their preference, capitals included :-)

While I prefer consistent bottom-posting, I don't think it's a big

deal for *some* kinds of discussions, and in those cases, I don't

care. And while I don't consider myself to have the right to direct

how other people write with respect to capitals or anything else

(though if I were a moderator, I would ban the use of all-CAPS, not

that it's a problem on this list), I'd just point out that I'm

probably not the only person who has made a resolution to refuse to

read anything written in CAPS. I just find the aesthetics revolting,

find it gives me dizziness and eye pain, and feel like I'm being

yelled at.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Chris-

For very short, self-contained responses which don't require reference to

the quoted text, top-posting is perfectly OK. Otherwise...

>I've never seen even a half-logical claim that top-posting is more

>advantageous, or even that it *isn't* a more or less abominable way

>to post (except in very short responses).

-

[Guest guest]

Good example of where common sense( n. Sound judgment not based on

specialized knowledge; native good judgment) and logic( n. The study of the

principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of propositions as

distinguished from their content and of method and validity in deductive

reasoning) likely disagrees again.

Wanita

> Chris-

>

> For very short, self-contained responses which don't require reference to

> the quoted text, top-posting is perfectly OK. Otherwise...

>

> >I've never seen even a half-logical claim that top-posting is more

> >advantageous,

>

> -

[Guest guest]

>

> >The world is divided into top and bottom posters, just like it is

> divided >between gram positive and gram negative bacteria ... ;--)

> >

> > -- Heidi Jean

>

> Lovely. I go by the rules of common sense (we read from top to

bottom

> naturally) and I get labled a bottom! NOT in this century

girlfriend!!!

> Although all bottoms *know* that they are *really* the ones in the

> drivers seat

LOL!

Chris

(Who really did laugh out loud, but thought for purposes of

demonstration that he would both 1) put traffic on the list without

adding anything to the discussion and 2)unnecessarily quote Heidi's

text that was no longer relevant- hehe)

[Guest guest]

Just one point to add to this discussion:

While sometimes top-posting is reasonable (as in the cases

described), it is definitely NOT reasonable when multiple lines are

interspersed within the text! I received a response on this list

recently that was in such a fashion, and I happened by luck to notice

while I was scrolling down to hit " send " that there was another one-

line response in the middle of the text.

If someone top-posts, I assume that they haven't interspersed their

text within the quoted text, and if they have, 99% chance I just will

not read it, having not known it was there. Furthermore, the post

made my head spin a little bit, as I naturally looked *above* the

quote to see the context (for the same reason I read the email from

left to right, rather than right to left, though curiously even the

top-posted emails still use the conventional left to right form of

spelling).

I'm not *threatening* not to read them in the same way that I would

threaten an all-CAPS writer that I wouldn't read their emails if they

continued to write in that manner, but it's worth noting that I'd

probably almost always accidentally miss the text and I'm sure others

would as well.

Chris

[Guest guest]

> Good example of where common sense( n. Sound judgment not based on

> specialized knowledge; native good judgment) and logic( n. The

study of the

> principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of

propositions as

> distinguished from their content and of method and validity in

deductive

> reasoning) likely disagrees again.

Are you responding to or me? Since you quoted both of us, and

top-posted, I have, simply put, no idea. Incidentally, notice that

the order of the text, due to the top-posting, is now C, D, B, A,

and, with bottom-posting, would be A, B, C, D. Furthremore, while it

is unambiguous that D is a response to C, it is unclear whether C is

a response to B or A. Beyond that, someone who initially reads D and

wants to follow the order of discussion backwards for the context

will have to first scroll UP, to read C, and then go down to read B

and A.

In any case, what did you mean?

Chris

> Wanita

>

> > Chris-

> >

> > For very short, self-contained responses which don't require

reference to

> > the quoted text, top-posting is perfectly OK. Otherwise...

> >

> > >I've never seen even a half-logical claim that top-posting is

more

> > >advantageous,

> >

> > -

[Guest guest]

>Most of the lists I've been

> on have top posting more than bottom. Does save time to not scroll

down. As

> the spammers won't leave us alone lately and I usually get to them

before

> , top posting is more appeciated.

Thgir ot tfel gnidaer ekil tsuj ,esu ew taht secneuqes laitaps

lanoitnevnoc eht swollof gnitsop-mottob taht tsuj s'ti.

Chris

[Guest guest]

> Re: top posting

>

>

>

>

>>Most of the lists I've been

>> on have top posting more than bottom. Does save time to not scroll

>down. As

>> the spammers won't leave us alone lately and I usually get to them

>before

>> , top posting is more appeciated.

>

>Thgir ot tfel gnidaer ekil tsuj ,esu ew taht secneuqes laitaps

>lanoitnevnoc eht swollof gnitsop-mottob taht tsuj s'ti.

>

>Chris

!hturt eht taht t'niA

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

“The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

[Guest guest]

>), I'd just point out that I'm

>probably not the only person who has made a resolution to refuse to

>read anything written in CAPS. I just find the aesthetics revolting,

>find it gives me dizziness and eye pain, and feel like I'm being

>yelled at.

>

>Chris

AMEN!

-- Heidi Jean

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 06:39:49 -0000

" chrismasterjohn " <ChrisMasterjohn@...> wrote:

> (slethnobotanist) posted a brilliant and detailed explanation

> of list netiquette a while ago, and if he has it on hand should

> repost it, since this has come up again.

>

As you wish, LOL! Actually I need to expand it and update it, but below

is the original.

##############

Hi folks,

I have a ton of posts from this list that I have yet to read, but as I

am perusing them I have noticed a few things that makes reading them

much more difficult. So below I have listed some suggestions that might

make handling the volume on this list much easier.

Note: these are *suggestions* not orations from Mt. Sinai, so please do

not take personal offense. I'm only trying to help make the experience on

this list as painless as possible. And as always, with everything that

is mentioned on this list, you are free to ignore any and everything I

say.

1. Top posting makes it difficult to read and follow the logic of a

response to a post. It also makes it difficult to keep a logical flow

when responding to a top poster who is responding to someone else.

What is top posting? It is when you respond to a post by putting your

reply at the top of the previous message rather than right after the

part of the message you are responding too.

There seems to be an awful lot of that as of late.

This is particularly annoying when you have a long response and it is

not immediately apparent what you are responding too. Then one has to

read your long post and often an equally long previous message only to

find that the portion you were responding too is buried toward the very

bottom of the previous post.

Unless you are extremely judicious like Idol in your top posting

(and he is the only top poster I have ever come across that I can read

without difficulty) I would suggest you avoid it.

Better for most of us to answer below the section we are responding too.

2. Related to the above is dead posts. Please please please remove all

aspects of the previous post that is not germane to your response. Some

top posters will answer with one line and then leave all the rest of the

previous post intact. Or some folks will answer after the whole body of

a previous message with just a couple of lines that only pertain to a

portion of the message.

Some will answer within the body of the message while still leaving

intact large portions of the message which have nothing to do with their

response. And others have 4 or 5 previous messages following their

response.

To make it easier on all of us, delete the dead portion of the posts.

3. As we learned in the off topic libertarian posts, it is very helpful

when one either changes the subject line to match such a change in the

reply or adds a tag to the current subject line to indicate its emphasis.

And while it is obvious on off topic posts, it is just as helpful for *on

topic* messages.

4. Please make sure you wrap your text when responding. If you don't and

someone is reading your post at the website, then it blows out the

formatting as one cannot see your message in the current window, but has

to scroll across the entire page to read it.

4. And last but not least, if you are replying in the body of a message,

please find a way to clearly set off your current remarks against any

previous remarks by you or someone else. There are many ways to do this

so I'm not going to insult anyone's intelligence by making suggestions.

But I just read two posts where I couldn't tell what was new, what was

old, and who was saying what.

Thanks for listening to my rant,

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 06:50:19 -0000

" chrismasterjohn " <ChrisMasterjohn@...> wrote:

<snip>

> While I prefer consistent bottom-posting, I don't think it's a big

> deal for *some* kinds of discussions, and in those cases, I don't

> care. And while I don't consider myself to have the right to direct

> how other people write with respect to capitals or anything else

> (though if I were a moderator, I would ban the use of all-CAPS, not

> that it's a problem on this list), I'd just point out that I'm

> probably not the only person who has made a resolution to refuse to

> read anything written in CAPS. I just find the aesthetics revolting,

> find it gives me dizziness and eye pain, and feel like I'm being

> yelled at.

>

> Chris

WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!!! I AM ABSOLUTELY TOTALLY AND

COMPLETELY OFFENDED.

The *New* Ten Commandments

http://tinyurl.com/245sr

" They told just the same,

That just because a tyrant has the might

By force of arms to murder men downright

And burn down house and home and leave all flat

They call the man a captain, just for that.

But since an outlaw with his little band

Cannot bring half such mischief on the land

Or be the cause of so much harm and grief,

He only earns the title of a thief. "

--Geoffrey Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale

[Guest guest]

> As you wish, LOL! Actually I need to expand it and update it, but

below

> is the original.

,

This piece IS what I was thinking of, but as I read it over, I had a

vague memory of you also posting a detailed argument for bottom-

posting that you had taken from some newsgroup or something written

by two authors. Do you remember this? Do you still have it if so?

Chris

[Guest guest]

I've been top posting for years [at least since 1993 when I frequented various

BBS's like Shadowlands] -- and with no ill health effects to report. I'm not

asking anyone to conform to the style, but to me it makes sense: the new

material appears at the top and the reference material appears at the bottom

[for people who need to jog their memories to clarify the context of the top].

-- Ken

http://www.pushindaisies.com/

> > > > But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt

> > > thought - Orwell

>

> replied:

> > > Are you suggesting that, over time, top-posters may begin thinking

> > > backwards?

> > >

> > > Chris

>

> Wanita replied further:

> > Your thought response here corrupted language to backwards.

>

> (Thank you for bottom-posting :-) )

> " Backwards " could be one form of corruption. I chose it because its

> an accurate description of the deviation that top-posters make from

> typical language format.

>

> > Did the chicken

> > (quote beginning) or the egg (quote end) come first?

>

> I think it's a trick question, but to the extent it can be answered,

> the egg.

>

> > More about the how or

> > from what a response is made than the position on the screen.

>

> Then I have no idea what you meant by using the Orwell quote.

>

> Chris

[Guest guest]

& Ken,

Preference to top or bottom post could have more to it than just habit or

how one was taught. Could be right/left brain dominance, balance of the two,

women's men's brain difference, type of memory, perception etc. Don't

really want to go there as to not get more labels applied to natural human

differentiations.

Wanita

> I've been top posting for years [at least since 1993 when I frequented

various BBS's like Shadowlands] -- and with no ill health effects to report.

>

> -- Ken

> > replied to Wanita:

> > > > Are you suggesting that, over time, top-posters may begin thinking

> > > > backwards?