| 1 |
For me, bottom posting is not netiquette but a total pitta. It wastes |
| 2 |
time and effort in reading mail on the mail readers I use. It was |
| 3 |
originally used by the first text mode readers and seems to be mainly |
| 4 |
inertia, continued by the design of mainly text based based readers |
| 5 |
(pine/mutt and the like) for its continued use. With graphical readers |
| 6 |
like evolution and outlook, who position their cursor at the start of a |
| 7 |
message, its a real pain. So unless a topic is really interesting, or |
| 8 |
properly trimmed I solve the problem by "bottom post > /dev/null". |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Of far more use is intelligent trimming. Far too many people dont |
| 11 |
correctly trim their mail which keeps both groups happy. If it fits on |
| 12 |
one screen, there's no reason both groups cant co-exist. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Lastly, top/bottom posting is a religion so you are unlikely to change |
| 15 |
either groups opinion, but just cause angst. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
flames > /dev/null |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
BillK |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 11:42 -0400, A. Khattri wrote: |
| 23 |
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Jonathan Nichols wrote: |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> > I remember the days of "netiquette." I guess I'm a grizzled old Usenet |
| 26 |
> > hippie. :| |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> No you're not - there's no excuse for not being polite and considerate of |
| 29 |
> others when posting. And that includes not top-posting and trimming your |
| 30 |
... |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives