Re: Top posting

• Previous message: Redefined Horizons: "Do I need to download and use the older package?"
• In reply to: Hal Vaughan: "Re: Top posting"
• Next in thread: Hal Vaughan: "Re: Top posting"
• Reply: Hal Vaughan: "Re: Top posting"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 20:01:17 -0500

On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 16:15 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
--snip--
> It is a metaphor. In both cases, groups have set themselves up as the
> authority on what is right and wrong, whether it is a technical or moral
> argument.

Any pre-existing group dictates policy to newcomers. When I go into a
new job, if they tell me to top post, I top post. When I go to a new
mailing list, if they tell me to bottom post, I bottom post. If a new
group doesn't specify how to post, I'll always bottom post since, in my
opinion, it makes the thread easier to read. The point is that in any
pre-existing group, the will of the group is 'right', and the will of
the newcomer is irrelevant. This may not be 'fair', but it's the way the
world works.

--snip--
> the Earth or the Earth orbits the Sun. What I've noticed is that those in
> favor generally are saying understanding and tolerating different ways is
> appropriate, while those against are saying, "this works, it makes sense, and
> it's right," without opening the door (which I've mentioned a few times) that
> many people process information in different ways. I've basically seen
> arguments that say that style makes it easy for one group to read, so that
> makes it right.

My response:

"That's the most self-serving, self-centered, one-sided point of view
I've read on any tech list in years."

To illustrate the point:

"What I've noticed is that those in favor [of top posting] generally are
saying understanding and tolerating different ways is appropriate..."

My response:

So top posters are morally superior to bottom posters because they, by
(your) definition, are open-minded. And bottom posters are morally
inferior because they, by definition, are closed-minded.

Side note:

"Hi, pot. This is kettle."

--snip--
> Information processing is also quite subjective. I learned that in a decade
> of dealing with the learning disabled. That's the point I've been driving
> toward for this whole thread, but everyone that has one way of looking at
> things is so sure they are right, they are literally unable to see another
> point of view, or even dare to consider it.

Disclaimer:

Just to stress one point before I get any further into this, the above
is NOT a flame. It's a semi-gentle poking fun at. :) As you may have
noticed by my first post in this thread (top vs bottom posting ==
proprietary vs free software users == self-centered vs group-oriented),
I like to make exaggerated points. I no more think that ALL proprietary
software users are evil than I think that your above points illustrate
your lack of intellect and utter lack of contribution to this thread.

Your posts thus far have shown that you are certainly intelligent (you
must be, you do use Debian after all :), and that you are (most of the
time at least) contributing very important and reasonably objective
information.

Response:

I've been following this thread pretty intently since the beginning, but
this is only my 2nd (relevant) post in it as I've have been busy
observing. I'd rather be thought a fool than open my mouth and remove
all doubt. :)

I think a very important point to make here is that you (among others)
are fighting the wrong battle. Most everyone in the thread just keeps
bringing up top vs bottom posting over and over again.

I think the real issue, and the one that gets briefly brought up and
then promptly forgotten, is posting in context. That is, trimming,
quoting, and replying. Top posting is, at best, not conducive to in-line
quoting and replying, and at worst completely incompatible with it.
Bottom posting is certainly conducive to in-line quoting, though it
certainly does not directly cause it. By the definition of top-posting,
_IF_ someone was, in fact, using in-line quoting with their preferred
posting style, their responses would PRECEDE each quote.

If an individual places text at the top of an email, and then proceeds
to use in-line quoting thereafter, that person is bottom-posting because
the response FOLLOWS the quote.

One final point to make here is that, from a human (not technical)
standpoint, replies to messages should be sent in a format that will
convey the content of the message to the recipient in the most efficient
manner. If your recipient is more comfortable with, and therefore more
efficient at processing top-posted material, then reply in a top-posted
fashion or vice versa. The first rule of communication is that the
content of your message is irrelevant if you cannot convey it to your
audience. If I have to tell you the meaning of life, and you understand
none of the languages that I speak, the importance of my message is
completely irrelevant. And if you will not be able to comprehend any
message which is not top-posted, then it is my responsibility to
top-post when communicating with you. (If, in fact, I give a damn about
getting my message across.)

Wow... that stretched out much longer than I expected... we now return
you to your regularly scheduled debate. :)

-- 
Alex Malinovich
Support Free Software, delete your Windows partition TODAY!
Encrypted mail preferred. You can get my public key from any of the
pgp.net keyservers. Key ID: A6D24837

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

• application/pgp-signature attachment: This is a digitally signed message part

• Previous message: Redefined Horizons: "Do I need to download and use the older package?"
• In reply to: Hal Vaughan: "Re: Top posting"
• Next in thread: Hal Vaughan: "Re: Top posting"
• Reply: Hal Vaughan: "Re: Top posting"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]