2 Jan
2014
2 Jan
'14
4:30 p.m.
On 02/01/14 14:44, Len Ovens wrote:
Bottom posting is not outdated at all, it is merely polite. On a high
volume list top posting wastes the readers time. So instead of one
writer taking a little more time to do things right, a large number of
readers have to spend extra time flipping up and down trying to figgure
our what the writer is saying. If mail clients make proper replying hard
or imposible then they have a bug and should be fixed or not used. I am
sure that if people started looking for another email client for their
phone, google would fix theirs right away so they can continue to trace
your internet tracks....
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
There's nothing inherently polite about it at all, it's only because
it's considered the norm that to do otherwise is considered impolite.
Again, it's begging the question. If -- oh, happy day! -- top-posting
were considered the norm, bottom-posting would be the height (or depth)
of rudeness.
The theory that bottom-posting is better is highly dependent upon people
trimming down previous messages and many, many people don't do that.
Then there are arguments caused by people being quoted out of context.
It might be a fine idea in theory, but it falls down in practice.
It's not the "proper" replying that's a problem, it's the proper
reading
-- every message in this thread, I've had to scroll to some degree to be
able to read what people have said. Had all the message been top-posted
I could have read the replies straightaway -- I don't need to read the
previous message. If I were to refer back at a later date, it's no big
deal to scroll down and work your way back up.
It's interesting that it's always a question of mail clients needing to
be fixed or having bugs and never that, just perhaps, the idea of
bottom-posting itself is what's broken.