Re: top posting

Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 08:43:44AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> O.k. this might be a bit snooty but frankly it is almost 2008. If you
>> are still a top poster, you obviously don't care about the people's
>> content that you are replying to, to have enough wits to not top post.
>>
>
> There are those who argue persuasively that emailing is more like letter
> writing than conversation, and that it is better to reply with one single
> set of paragraphs than with a set of replies interspersed with quotes.
> Moreover, under such circumstances, it is utterly silly to quote the entire
> original argument first, because the reader then has to plough through a
> long block of reproduced content to get to the novel stuff.
>
> On a mailing list, perhaps one can argue that the conventions simply have to
> be followed. But I know I find it pretty annoying to get 36 lines of quoted
> text followed by something like, "No: see the manual, section x.y.z."
>
> I don't think top posting is always the crime it's made to be (and I get a
> little tired of lectures to others about it on these lists).
>
> A
>
I agree. Obviously there is convention, and I will post in the style
generally accepted in the list, but to me it always made more sense to
top post. If you're keeping up on the conversation, then the relevant
information is right there, and if you weren't, it's not that difficult
to go through and catch up (it's not like the lines are in reverse
order, or the words spelled backwards or something).

I have a great deal of respect for you Joshua, and you've helped me out
of a jam more than once, but quite frankly, that is a bit snooty lol.
Still, there is a convention here, and I can respect that, but please
don't insult people who see the world in a different direction than you :-)

Tom