Re: Linux locking on boot

From: Sybren Stuvel (sybrenUSE_at_YOURthirdtower.imagination.com)
Date: 04/04/04 

Date: 04 Apr 2004 18:35:06 GMT

WTH enlightened us with:
> In example one, *assuming* people have read the original post, what is
> the advantage to bottom posting in your reply? I don't see one.

The advantage is that I can read the question and the answer in one
go. Usually, I don't pay much attention to the subject, since they
don't really cover the content anyway. I recognise the post by it's
contents, in which case it's very comfortable to read the question and
then be able to read the answer to it in one go.

> I can see a very minor advantage in top posting because people who
> have just read the original post will not have to scroll through the
> original post in your reply before seeing your actual textual reply.

I agree with you here. If someone replies below the text that is being
replied to, it should be readable on the first page of the post,
without any scrolling.

> 10 posts in, everytime a participant wishes to vew your reply they
> must scroll and scroll and scroll (because they cannot assume that
> you have not inlined some of your comments) to check throughout the
> entire progression of the post before coming upon your reply.

Again I agree with you. Top-posting isn't the solution, though. As I
see it, quoting a piece of text is to add context to a reply. If I
would have typed "I agree with you" without even the smallest piece of
context, you wouldn't have known what I was agreeing with, making my
reply kinda pointless. So I quote just enough text so people know what
I'm talking about - but no more than that!

> The advantage for top posting is that the current participants only
> need to read the portion of the post which is instantly visible.

But why quote the entire post if it isn't going to be read? Someone
who has missed the previous post can tell her Usenet client to fetch
it for her (alt+p with slrn) so she can read it anyway. That is why I
see quoted text as a means to add context to a reply more than a way
to fill in missing posts.

>> In the English speaking world we read left to right, top to bottom.
> But, imho, that's a terrible argument.

IMO, it's a good argument. If I have to read a line, my eyes go to the
line below that automatically. If I have to read bottom to top in
order to read things in a chronological, sensible order, I have to
take a lot more effort.

> NG posts are conversational, not literary, plus as soon as people
> comment inline (*very* common) this value is gone.

Inline posting is a form of bottom posting, since the text is typed
below the text that it refers/answers to. Again, the post can be read
in an order that comes natural to us.

> Indeed. This is the most effective method between two participants.

And between more participants as well.

> Aaah, but this almost NEVER happens because we have ng clients that
> automatically place us at the bottom.

That's just as bad an excuse as "my Usenet clients puts my cursor at
the top so I top post". My client puts the cursor at the top too,
because I instructed it to. That way, I can start snipping text and
replying in one go, making it very comfortable to inline-reply.

> In all honestly Sybren, I really believe that top posters have the
> most logical solution

I have to disagree here. If I would have typed all the small pieces of
my reply entirely at the top of this message, it would have had a lot
lesser value than it currently has. I wouldn't be able to just say "I
agree" without having to clarify what I was referring to.

I think my way of posting is the more logical one, especially if you
agree that people can always look up older posts (since the delay
nowadays isn't days any more) so quoting text is for giving context
instead of anything else.

Sybren 

-- 
The problem with the world is stupidity. Not saying there should be a
capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the
safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Parameter Object really necessary?
    ... a perfectly good answer and complain about only a top/bottom post is plain ... bottom posting is a lot more annoying. ... > and don't have to scroll down or exclude signatures or anything else. ... >> Microsoft MVP ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet)
  • Top & Bottom posting vs Netiquette [was Re: CM8738 On-Board Sound Problems (Works...mostly....mo
    ... >]In the English speaking world we read left to right, top to bottom. ... but they do *not* give you the context of a Top-Posted remark. ... >Top posting is far more polite many times than is bottom posting. ... material is stored in the drawer that contains other related items. ...
    (alt.os.linux)
  • Re: A plea to the list - post trimming
    ... When someone posts a 90 line email, quoting reams and reams of text ... enough info to put your reply in context. ... be bottom posting won't you!) ... I'm reading this from gmane.org using NNTP. ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • [opensuse] Re: Hi
    ... Chuck Davis writes: ... for a review but I seldom need to review a message to which I am ... Like you, I can scroll down to refresh my memory, but if one interested in a thread, then that person already know what has been said before because he/she would have had to have read the message he/she is replying to. ... Now I don't know if bottom posting is a written rule, or an unwritten rule, but if it is a written rule, adopted by the powers that be, then that should be made clear to everyone. ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: What kind of pan do they use?
    ... > Modern ediquitte is to top post, but of course, there are ... Top posting suffers from lack of context, ... bottom posting also REQUIRES, for acceptable readability, that people ... by a 'ME TOO!'" type of response that used to be the hallmark of the ...
    (rec.food.cooking)