Re: Etiquette and Top-Posting

gort wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 00:52:18 -0700, Dave X wrote:

Top-posting is a means of showing courtesy to other
NG users by replying to them when you have something
to contribute.

So you also answer questions before they are asked ?. Which is what
top posting really does.

Dave

Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting
By A. Smit and H.W. de Haan

Definitions:
Top-posting: Writing the message above the original text, when one replies
to an email or a post in a newsgroup.
Bottom-posting: The opposite of top-posting. Now the new message is placed
below the original text.

We are fanatic Usenet-readers. As a result we are often annoyed by people
who keep top-posting. This is considered as not good 'Net etiquette'. The
majority of Usenet-users prefer bottom-posting.
In addition to bottom-posting, it is customary to leave out non-relevant
parts of the message with regard to the reply, and to put the reply directly
beneath the quoted relevant parts. Below you can find our arguments why
bottom-posting is better than top-posting.

1.. Because it is proper Usenet Etiquette. Check out the following URL:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html . It is a little outdated but still
has a lot of valid points. Let us quote something from this site:

If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough
text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers
understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially,
is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is
possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving
context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!

2.. We use a good news reader like Forte Agent. Good newsreaders like
Agent put the signature by default at the end of the post, which is the
Usenet convention. Microsoft Outlook Express however has some serious bugs.
Let us quote someone we know:

"The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day
they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
We are programmers ourselves, and we know it is very easy to implement to
put a signature at the end of the post instead of putting it directly above
the post you are replying to and can not change the position. Forte Agent
has as a feature that reply to a post it will remove the signature
(recognizable by '-- ', note the extra space) and everything below it, so it
will remove a part of the original message. This is good Usenet practice so
Agent is not faulty. Outlook Express on the other hand is faulty.


3.. Top-posting makes posts incomprehensible. Firstly: In normal
conversations, one does not answer to something that has not yet been said.
So it is unclear to reply to the top, whilst the original message is at the
bottom. Secondly: In western society a book is normally read from top to
bottom. Top-posting forces one to stray from this convention: Reading some
at the top, skipping to the bottom to read the question, and going back to
the top to continue. This annoyance increases even more than linear with the
number of top-posts in the message. If someone replies to a thread and you
forgot what the thread was all about, or that thread was incomplete for some
reasons, it will be quite tiresome to rapidly understand what the thread was
all about, due to bad posting and irrelevant text which has not been
removed.

4.. To prevent hideously long posts with a minimal account of new text, it
is good Usenet practice to remove the non-relevant parts and optionally
summarize the relevant parts of the original post, with regard to one's
reply. Top-posting inevitably leads to long posts, because most top-posters
leave the original message intact. All these long posts not only clutter up
discussions, but they also clutter up the server space.

5.. Top-posting makes it hard for bottom-posters to reply to the relevant
parts: it not possible to answer within the original message. Bottom-posting
does not make top-posting any harder.

6.. Some people will argue that quoting looks bad due line wrapping. This
can simply be dealt with by dropping Outlook Express as a start, and using
only linewidths of 65 - 70 characters. Otherwise one has do it manually, and
that can be tiresome.

7.. A reason given by stubborn top-posters: they don't like to scroll to
read the new message. We like to disagree here, because we always have to
scroll down to see the original message and after that to scroll back up,
just to see to what they are replying to. As a result you have to scroll
twice as much when reading a top-poster's message. As a counterargument they
say (believe us they do): "You can check the previous message in the
discussion". This is even more tiresome than scrolling and with the
unreliable nature of Usenet (and even email is inevitably unreliable), the
previous message in the discussion can be simply unavailable.

8.. Some newsgroups have strict conventions concerning posting in their
charter. As an example we can tell you that in most Dutch newsgroups, you
will be warned, killfiled or maybe even flamed, if you fail to follow Usenet
conventions or if you do not quote according to the quoting guidelines. In
general: it is better to practice the guidelines, if one does not want to
get flamed in a newsgroup one just subscribed to.

We can conclude that there are no good reasons we know of for top-posting.
The most top-posts originate from the minimal work people spend on making
posts. We think that one should be proud of one's post, that is it contains
relevant content, well-formed sentences and no irrelevant 'bullsh*t', before
uploading to your newsserver. If the majority of the group will adhere to
this convention, the group will be nicer, tidier and easier to read.
As a final remark we want to bring non-quoting into mind. This means that
the original content of an email or Usenet post is completely removed. It
makes it very hard for a reader to find out to what and whom one is
replying. This phenomenon can be partly attributed to wrong settings of
news- and email-clients, and partly to people who want to start with clean
replies.


--
huLLy
Big K and now the (Sergeant) Fuller Effect - ain't life grand!
Tel: 07976 123278
villageidiot(at)sheepandmeths.co.uk
ICQ 136-987-925


.

Relevant Pages

  • [OT] Top Posting
    ... Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting ... Because it is proper Usenet Etiquette. ... The most top-posts originate from the minimal work people spend on making ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Nilsson Remembers?
    ... But you have a score card with my name on it because I lose points when I remind you that top posting is bad form on Usenet. ... Top-posting forces one to stray from this convention: Reading some at the top, skipping to the bottom to read the question, and going back to the top to continue. ... A reason given by stubborn top-posters: they don't like to scroll to read the new message. ... The most top-posts originate from the minimal work people spend on making posts. ...
    (rec.music.beatles)
  • Mouth Breathing Top Posters
    ... Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet ... including all those quotes might get five-ten times larger ... Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting ... The most top-posts originate from the minimal work people spend on making ...
    (rec.games.chess.computer)
  • Re: Confused over validation
    ... Of course you can always lobby for you countries government to regulate the USENET posts on the LOCAL ISPs news servers. ... If you wouldn't, then learn to live with the FACT that how a person posts their posts is their decision, and other than trying to rationally explain why you believe bottom-posting is better for you than top-posting, bitching about it will accomplish nothing. ... I used to mainly top-post when replying to an entire post, though I inline-posted when replying to different points in the same post. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Problem with onClick with JavaScript
    ... The comment "please do not toppost on usenet" implies that these newsgroups are provided by usenet but not Microsoft. ... top-posting and bottom-posting are used in the same reply. ... Maybe you should get a decent newsreader, anything is more decent than OE, and not near as full of security holes. ...
    (microsoft.public.scripting.jscript)
Loading