|
|
Posted by AnthonyR on 10/18/05 18:02
"Bob" <spam@uce.gov> wrote in message
news:43550464.76648296@news-server.houston.rr.com...
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:16:01 GMT, Justin <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
>>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.
>
> That is the main reason for not top posting.
>
> If I have not been following the thread carefully, I will not know
> what the top-posted response is referring to. Even if I read the
> entire post below the reply, I still will not know what the reply is
> referring to.
>
> The correct way is to snip out all the old material from the original
> post leaving enough to establish context, and then post your replies
> in the correct places so the reader can follow what you are saying.
>
>
Also, because this entire posting etiquete exchange is off-topic a new
thread should have been started, no?
So the rest of us don't have to read 5-10 posts before realizing there is no
longer info about dvd changers.
Maybe one day soon a computer software program built into the newsgroup
engine can automatically sort out text in
post and re-format them properly, remove quotes past 3 replies and also
start new threads when no relative text is detected?
LOL Until then we are bound to see this stuff erupt often. By the way, I am
nuetral and can read and figure out both styles with no problem.
It's not that hard, and if I don't understand a post, big deal, their loss
that I didn't get their point, and I move on.
:)
AnthonyR.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|