1 Apr
2005
1 Apr
'05
7:11 a.m.
Please excuse top-posting.
^^^^^^^
This is the 2nd time in a few days I see this term used.
What does it mean?
m
----
http://www.mprims.tk
___________________________________________
Sent with iMailReader - http://www.imailreader.com/
Read and send e-mail from anywhere in the world!
1 Apr
1 Apr
9:18 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Quicktoots release number 15
This.
Last Friday 01 April 2005 11:11, mprims(a)skynet.be was like:
confusing isn't it?
tim hall
http://glastonburymusic.org.uk
Please excuse
top-posting.
^^^^^^^
This is the 2nd time in a few days I see this term used.
What does it mean?
m
----
http://www.mprims.tk
___________________________________________
Sent with iMailReader - http://www.imailreader.com/
Read and send e-mail from anywhere in the world! 
9:53 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Quicktoots release number 15
On Friday 01 April 2005 20:11, mprims(a)skynet.be wrote:
Enter "top vs bottom posting" into google. This reply, for
instance, is bottom-posted.
--markc
Please excuse
top-posting.
^^^^^^^
This is the 2nd time in a few days I see this term used.
What does it mean? 
10:24 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Quicktoots release number 15
Greetings:
I routinely top-post in compliance with the wishes of blind members of
this and other lists. They use tts readers for their mail and do not
wish to re-read the original post.
Best,
dp
Mark Constable wrote:
On Friday 01 April 2005 20:11, mprims(a)skynet.be wrote:
Enter "top vs bottom posting" into google. This reply, for
instance, is bottom-posted.
--markc
Please
excuse top-posting.
^^^^^^^
This is the 2nd time in a few days I see this term used.
What does it mean?
10:42 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Quicktoots release number 15
On Fri, 01 Apr, 2005 at 08:44AM -0500, Dave Phillips spake thus:
Greetings:
I routinely top-post in compliance with the wishes of blind members of
this and other lists. They use tts readers for their mail and do not
wish to re-read the original post.
Best,
dp
I tend to do this. If it's a short original message, I post at the
bottom. If I want to address several points from the original, I
interleave my post to give context. If it's a long post, I stick it
at the top. That seems to suit most people.
Mark Constable wrote:
--
"I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated
Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb. Thank you."
(By Vance Petree, Virginia Power)
On Friday 01 April 2005 20:11, mprims(a)skynet.be
wrote:
Enter "top vs bottom posting" into google. This reply, for
instance, is bottom-posted.
Please
excuse top-posting.
^^^^^^^
This is the 2nd time in a few days I see this term used.
What does it mean?
3:16 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Quicktoots release number 15
On Friday 01 April 2005 07:42 am, james(a)dis-dot-dat.net wrote:
I tend to do this. If it's a short original
message, I post at the
bottom. If I want to address several points from the original, I
interleave my post to give context. If it's a long post, I stick it
at the top. That seems to suit most people.
+1, although the point about the blind is one I hadn't really
considered--maybe I should do more top posting.
In any event, I suspect the blind would appreciate aggressive snipping for
similar reasons.
Randy Kramer
6:11 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Quicktoots release number 15
On Fri, 01 Apr, 2005 at 12:49PM -0500, Randy Kramer spake thus:
<snip>
similar reasons.
<snip>
Just be careful about keeping the context ;)
--
"I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated
Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb. Thank you."
(By Vance Petree, Virginia Power)
10:59 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] OT: Top vs bottom Posting (was Quicktoots release number 15)
On Friday 01 April 2005 23:44, Dave Phillips wrote:
I routinely top-post in compliance with the wishes of
blind members of
this and other lists. They use tts readers for their mail and do not
wish to re-read the original post.
Seeing it's still April 1 here...
Very good point but that assumes they are following a thread
and understand the context of a new top-posted message. If
they arrive at a single message from a search then they may
have to do double duty to figure out the top-posted context.
What I don't like about about top-posting is that it leads to
people leaving the original postings untrimmed beneath their
response. What is far worse is a one-liner bottom posting at
the very end of a multi-responded untrimmed message.
--markc
11:54 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] OT: Top vs bottom Posting (was Quicktoots release number 15)
On Fri, 01 Apr, 2005 at 11:59PM +1000, Mark Constable spake thus:
On Friday 01 April 2005 23:44, Dave Phillips wrote:
A. Because it breaks the logical order of conversation.
Q. Why is top posting bad?
--
"I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated
Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb. Thank you."
(By Vance Petree, Virginia Power)
I routinely top-post in compliance with the
wishes of blind members of
this and other lists. They use tts readers for their mail and do not
wish to re-read the original post.
Seeing it's still April 1 here...
Very good point but that assumes they are following a thread
and understand the context of a new top-posted message. If
they arrive at a single message from a search then they may
have to do double duty to figure out the top-posted context.
What I don't like about about top-posting is that it leads to
people leaving the original postings untrimmed beneath their
response. What is far worse is a one-liner bottom posting at
the very end of a multi-responded untrimmed message. 
12:41 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] OT: Top vs bottom Posting (was Quicktoots release number 15)
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 14:55:11 +0100
james(a)dis-dot-dat.net wrote:
A. Because it breaks the logical order of
conversation.
Q. Why is top posting bad?
Q: What's worse than top posting?
A: Lazy twits(*) who can't be bothered to actually edit the message they're
replying to. This is especially bad when a member of a digest version
of a list replies.
FWIW, I blame the purveyors of mail programs that don't include the
message being replied to as editable text in the message. I also blame
them for ruining email with HTML, but that's another rant.
(*) I in no way mean to imply that james(a)dis-dot-dat.net is a twit.
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
1:15 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] OT: Top vs bottom Posting (was Quicktoots release number 15)
Joe Hartley wrote:
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 14:55:11 +0100
james(a)dis-dot-dat.net wrote:
I had no idea there was even etiquette surrounding such a thing! :) But
then Etiquette has never been the first thing I study in any thing I do
anyhooow!
For all my misgivings on this and anything else I have ever done that
pissed anyone orf, I apologize profusely. There! That oughta cover me
for another ten years! :)
Now what was that about dragging a subject off topic again?? ;)
Cheers
A. Because it breaks the logical order of
conversation.
Q. Why is top posting bad?
Q: What's worse than top posting?
A: Lazy twits(*) who can't be bothered to actually edit the message they're
replying to. This is especially bad when a member of a digest version
of a list replies.
FWIW, I blame the purveyors of mail programs that don't include the
message being replied to as editable text in the message. I also blame
them for ruining email with HTML, but that's another rant.
(*) I in no way mean to imply that james(a)dis-dot-dat.net is a twit.
6:13 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] OT: Top vs bottom Posting (was Quicktoots release number 15)
On Fri, 01 Apr, 2005 at 10:41AM -0500, Joe Hartley spake thus:
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 14:55:11 +0100
james(a)dis-dot-dat.net wrote:
Hey, no need to be formal. James will do. I only use my full name
for legal purposes.
--
"I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated
Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb. Thank you."
(By Vance Petree, Virginia Power)
A. Because it breaks the logical order of
conversation.
Q. Why is top posting bad?
Q: What's worse than top posting?
A: Lazy twits(*) who can't be bothered to actually edit the message they're
replying to. This is especially bad when a member of a digest version
of a list replies.
FWIW, I blame the purveyors of mail programs that don't include the
message being replied to as editable text in the message. I also blame
them for ruining email with HTML, but that's another rant.
(*) I in no way mean to imply that james(a)dis-dot-dat.net is a twit. 
1:30 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] OT: Top vs bottom Posting (was Quicktoots release number 15)
On Apr 1, 2005 5:59 AM, Mark Constable <markc(a)renta.net> wrote:
On Friday 01 April 2005 23:44, Dave Phillips wrote:
Interesting. Every time this conversation has come up in my
experiences blind users have always stated exactly the opposite. They
wish people would quote and post correctly.
I routinely top-post in compliance with the
wishes of blind members of
this and other lists. They use tts readers for their mail and do not
wish to re-read the original post.
8:31 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] top posting (was Quicktoots release number 15)
Hi,
01Apr2005 @ 08:44 Dave Phillips thusly spake
I routinely top-post in compliance with the wishes of
blind members of
this and other lists. They use tts readers for their mail and do not
wish to re-read the original post.
I'd like to ask a visually impaired person about the issues of reading mailing list
postings and email, specifically, I'd be very interested to hear their views on
'top posting'.
Bottom posting allows the reader to first read what 'this' post is responding to,
then the response. It seems logical to me.
my $0.02,
kr,
Luke
--
/ / _
/_ /_/ /< /=
0421 276 282
10:51 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Quicktoots release number 15
On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 08:44 -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:
I routinely top-post in compliance with the wishes
of blind members of
this and other lists. They use tts readers for their mail and do not
wish to re-read the original post.
Top posting is not the answer. The solution is to trim the message you
are replying to.
Lee
7178
days inactive
7178
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
15 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
Dave Phillips -
james＠dis-dot-dat.net -
Joe Hartley -
Lee Revell -
luke＠chipcity.com.au -
Mark Constable -
mprims＠skynet.be -
Noah Roberts -
Randy Kramer -
Russell Hanaghan -
tim hall