Re: and also
- From: Brad Greer <jjh1102us@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 11:33:43 -0500
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 15:03:57 -0500, "gb" <none@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>I'm sure many people here can remember years ago that this newsgroup was all
>top post, like all the others. It was only in the last 3-4 years that some
>"netiqute" folks changed all the rules (not to mention started criticizing
>people who did it the old way).
Why don't you try googling threads from, say, 1995 and see if everyone
top-posted. I think you'll be surprised to find that it was not the
norm back then.
>I for one have been communicating with people here since the beginning,
>since even before there was a "web" when everything was text only, and
>newsgroups was basically all there was on the internet. I like it the old
>way better myself.
Apparently not, or maybe you don't remember the old way. The old way
was to trim the post you're responding to (if needed) and post below
the comments so people could follow the conversation.
BTW, what name did you post under "in the beginning"? I'd like to see
the threads you participated in back then.
>Keep in mind, software developers get paid big bucks to make software easier
>to use, and make it possible for users to accomplish things with less
>clicks. Bottom posting causes the user to always have to scroll down to
>find the information they are looking for first. If a software designer
>came up with something like that, they'd get fired.
>
If software developers get paid big bucks to make software easier to
use they do a poor job of it. Far too much software (especially on
Windows) is bloatware, filled with worthless features that most people
don't need making the software harder, not easier, to use.
Accomplishing things with "less clicks" may be your definition of
easier, although it's not the definition everyone uses. The
long-standing netiquette is that you trim the previous post leaving
only the parts that are relevant to your reply and post beneath the
quoted text. Microsoft (and AOL when they first started granting
internet access) decided that's not the way they like to do it so they
changed the conventions. You may find it easier because you're used
to Microsoft tools for e-mail and usenet, those of us who use
different tools that don't comply to the Microsoft standards find it
easier to do things the way we always have.
.
- References:
- why do we have to reply/comment at the bottom of intead of the top?
- From: gb
- Re: why do we have to reply/comment at the bottom of intead of the top?
- From: Ken Fortenberry
- Re: why do we have to reply/comment at the bottom of intead of the top?
- From: scarletbgonias@xxxxxxxxxxx
- exactly my point
- From: gb
- and also
- From: gb
- why do we have to reply/comment at the bottom of intead of the top?
- Prev by Date: Re: your favorite venues?
- Next by Date: Re: Tough choices ... whatcha doing December 31??
- Previous by thread: Re: and also
- Next by thread: Re: exactly my point
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
