Re: top posting?

On 6 May 2013 20:15, Craig James <cjames(at)emolecules(dot)com> wrote:

> Just out of curiousity, I see comments like this all the time:
>
> > (*please* stop top-posting).
>
> I've been participating in newsgroups since UUCP days, and I've never
> encountered a group before that encouraged bottom posting. Bottom posting
> has traditionally been considered rude -- it forces readers to scroll,
> often through pages and pages of text, to see a few lines of original
> material.
>
> The most efficient strategy, one that respects other members' time, is to
> briefly summarize your point at the TOP of a posting, then to *briefly*
> quote only the relevant parts of the post to which you are replying, and
> bottom-post after the quoted text. That lets your reader quickly see if
> it's relevant or not, and move on to the next post.
>
> Contributors in these newsgroups seem to think it's OK to quote five pages
> of someone else's response, then add one or two sentences at the bottom ...
> it's just laziness that forces readers to wade through the same stuff over
> and over in each thread.
>
> How did the Postgres newsgroups get started with this "only bottom post"
> idea?
>
> (I'm not trying to start a flame war, just genuinely curious.)
>
> Craig
>

Hi Craig,

That's strange. I've never met any newsgroup which would require top
posting. Top posting has always been considered rude.

We are reading from top to bottom. That's why people should answer below
cited text, so we can read it later normally. I mean that I should read
first the part of email you answer to, and than below your answer.

http://www.idallen.com/topposting.html

regards
Szymon