Re: top posting?

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Szymon Guz <mabewlun(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> 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).
>>
>
> 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.
>

Exactly. That's why the very FIRST thing you read should be relevant
instead of a bunch of quoted text that the poster was too lazy to edit.

My real gripe is with laziness, not bottom posting. Anyone who can't spend
a minute to edit quoted material to the relevant part is forcing thousands
of readers to wade through irrelevant crap. It's inconsiderate.

Claims that "top post " or "bottom post" is better miss the point. The
real issue has nothing to do with top- or bottom-posting. It's about
relevance, effective editing, and paraphrasing.

Notice that I manage to make my point here, and to quote only the relevant
bits of your email, within the first twenty lines. That means you can read
it without scrolling, and decide whether to click "delete", or continue on
to read this paragraph, which may be more wordy and reiterate points made
in the first part. You didn't have to wade through stuff that you'd
already read before deciding that this long and wordy paragraph, which is
mostly fluff and irrelevant reiteration of points already made, was of any
interest to you. You already got the important bits. ;-). Now you can
click "delete."

Craig