Re: Top Posting

In article <DHJIVHC5zUrDFwOw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Guy Inchbald
<URL:mailto:guy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 18:29:23, Tim <Tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[snip]

> Microsoft looked at the way business letters are constructed: you write
> a *covering* letter, then attach all the referenced sheets after it. So
> in creating an email client intended for the windowing business desktop,
> it was natural to follow that pattern.

ITYF that it also follows the conventional manual office practice, where the
latest letters are placed at the 'top' of the file. Im a manual system this
works fine, but in applying this method to email [*], it was overlooked that
sending the a copy of the whole previous file along with every reply would
soon lead to overload, and eventually cause complete chaos, especially where
the original letter had multiple recipients ...

> IMHO none of these ways is "wrong". For these NGs I prefer
> trimming/interleaving, ...

Agreed.

>while for the official corporate gumf at work I frankly prefer top posting
>much of the time, and resort to interleaving only for detailed exchanges
>with those geekier colleagues who can cope with it.

Fairy nuff, but I always interleave, even if I've received something 'top
posted'. I just snip everything but what I'm responding to - reordering
where necessary to give a logical *forward* sequence.

[*] Many of today's problems with office computerisation have come about by
basing programs on the old manual system of working, instead of properly
analysing it and producing a new methods geared to the advantages the
computer brings. The words 'lunatics' and 'asylum' spring to mind.

'Top Posting' is a particularly good example of this. It's annoying because
it imposes this idiocy on those of us accustomed to the more sensible methods
used for many years - in my case since Micronet on the Beeb.

Merry Christmas!

[snip]

All the best,

Iain

'You need to be very careful when drawing up a specification, otherwise you
risk getting what you ask for rather than what you want.'

--

Iain Logan, Langholm, Dumfriesshire - Chartered Transport Consultant
<http://homepages.enterprise.net/iainlogan/>
<mailto:iainlogan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

.