2 Jan
2014
2 Jan
'14
5:39 p.m.
On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 17:22:33 +0100
Philipp Überbacher <murks(a)tuxfamily.org> wrote:
On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 15:45:03 +0000
Q <lists(a)quirq.net> wrote:
Exactly.
The first mail reader to use top posting by default was Outlook {spit} because
Microsoft in their infinite wisdom thought businesses would want to keep a
record in the same manner as paper filing cabinets - totally ignoring the fact
that the mail thread does exactly that in a far more efficient manner.
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
My point was, there is nothing inherently
polite/rude about either
posting style. However, bottom-posting IS very inconvenient to read.
If trimming is so important and bottom-posting breaks without it, why
quote ANYTHING at all.
After all, what's quoted in bottom-posting is incomplete chunks and
no longer a full record of all that's gone before (which isn't an
issue that top-posting by design has to have), which makes it even
more inconvenient, because if you need context you have to flick
backwards and forwards between different messages to get the full
picture.
The arguments in favour of bottom-posting are illogical.
How would you respond to several distinct parts of a longish mail in
your top-posting style?
Regards,
Philipp