|
Home > Archive > Alternative Power sources > September 2005 > Top Posters Unite!
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Top Posters Unite!
|
|
| RF Dude 2005-09-18, 10:21 pm |
| Bottom posters just love to scroll down for *every* message instead of using
their page down button or simply clicking on the next message to see
something new.
Bottom posting became popular when the mouse scroll wheel was invented...
one justifies the other.
Bottom posters don't like to use a split screen to display message contents
since the space available is never enough to get them past the stuff they've
already read before.... they open each message to the entire screen so that
they have half a chance of seeing the response (at the bottom of the message
of course).
Bottom posters have such a short memory that they didn't remember what they
just read one posting ago and like to see it all over again or don't like to
move one post up to see previous contributions.
On an emotional side, bottom posters love the suspense waiting for the new
response to show up while they are scrolling feverishly downward. They
would never cut, edit or abbreviate previous information to make their
response shorter. This would shorten the anticipation while searching for
the new contribution. Why read the readers digest version when you can have
it all?
If they can't use their scroll wheel to get to the nugget of new info, the
bottom poster doesn't feel fulfilled!
TOP POSTERS UNITE! Do post on the top! Do edit out repetitious
information, or leave only the bare minimum required for continuity BELOW
your new information (as a courtesy)! Be helpful to all the other readers
so they can see the new information or response with no further fuss, delay,
or effort. The biggest way to frustrate bottom posters is to give them the
information up-top so that the bottom poster doesn't have to scroll or
anticipate! WE SHALL PREVAIL!
| |
| Ulysses 2005-09-18, 10:21 pm |
| Yea, I got shamed into bottom posting, but no more! I shall revert back to
my old degenerate ways no matter what the God of Usenet may say!
Who the hell decided that proper etiquette requires bottom posting anyway?
Probably some snob who never finished college and wears funny robes all the
time but has a long list of abbreviations after his name but doesn't
actually know how to do anything!
"RF Dude" <post@thisnewsgroup.com> wrote in message
news:_nnXe.668$0u2.258889@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Bottom posters just love to scroll down for *every* message instead of
using
> their page down button or simply clicking on the next message to see
> something new.
>
> Bottom posting became popular when the mouse scroll wheel was invented...
> one justifies the other.
>
> Bottom posters don't like to use a split screen to display message
contents
> since the space available is never enough to get them past the stuff
they've
> already read before.... they open each message to the entire screen so
that
> they have half a chance of seeing the response (at the bottom of the
message
> of course).
>
> Bottom posters have such a short memory that they didn't remember what
they
> just read one posting ago and like to see it all over again or don't like
to
> move one post up to see previous contributions.
>
> On an emotional side, bottom posters love the suspense waiting for the new
> response to show up while they are scrolling feverishly downward. They
> would never cut, edit or abbreviate previous information to make their
> response shorter. This would shorten the anticipation while searching for
> the new contribution. Why read the readers digest version when you can
have
> it all?
>
> If they can't use their scroll wheel to get to the nugget of new info, the
> bottom poster doesn't feel fulfilled!
>
> TOP POSTERS UNITE! Do post on the top! Do edit out repetitious
> information, or leave only the bare minimum required for continuity BELOW
> your new information (as a courtesy)! Be helpful to all the other readers
> so they can see the new information or response with no further fuss,
delay,
> or effort. The biggest way to frustrate bottom posters is to give them
the
> information up-top so that the bottom poster doesn't have to scroll or
> anticipate! WE SHALL PREVAIL!
>
>
| |
| Vaughn 2005-09-18, 10:21 pm |
|
"RF Dude" <post@thisnewsgroup.com> wrote in message
news:_nnXe.668$0u2.258889@news20.bellglobal.com...
Why do we have to discuss some iron-bound posting style as if it were some
sort of religious principle? Why not top post, middle post, or bottom post as
happens to be appropriate to the situation?
If I respond to more than one point in a post, I will middle post in two or
more places, snipping text that is not related to the points I am responding to.
If I am responding in the middle of a thread and someone is likely to add
additional points, then bottom posting gives the best flow. Here, it is
important to snip extraneous text, or everybody will have to scroll to find my
contribution.
If I am answering a simple question and there is no particular reason for
the thread to grow, then I top post; after being courteous enough to snip any
excess text from the original post.
There is one common point in the three posting styles; snip, snip, snip.
Vaughn
| |
| Dave Hinz 2005-09-18, 11:21 pm |
| On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 20:12:44 -0400, RF Dude <post@thisnewsgroup.com> wrote:
> Bottom posters just love to scroll down for *every* message instead of using
> their page down button or simply clicking on the next message to see
> something new.
No, people who trim unneeded context make communication work.
> TOP POSTERS UNITE! Do post on the top! Do edit out repetitious
> information, or leave only the bare minimum required for continuity BELOW
> your new information (as a courtesy)! Be helpful to all the other readers
> so they can see the new information or response with no further fuss, delay,
> or effort. The biggest way to frustrate bottom posters is to give them the
> information up-top so that the bottom poster doesn't have to scroll or
> anticipate! WE SHALL PREVAIL!
Not for long. <plonk> Enjoy talking to yourself.
| |
| Solar Flare 2005-09-19, 12:21 am |
| Oh look! All the headers are with their respective posting texts too! What a
concept!
And to make matters even worse they all have to waste a couple of characters
every line to tell, or guess, who posted what. I didn't.
Let's see somebody bottom post this one.
"Ulysses" <therealulysses@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11is27nco7tp48a@corp.supernews.com...
Yea, I got shamed into bottom posting, but no more! I shall revert back to
my old degenerate ways no matter what the God of Usenet may say!
Who the hell decided that proper etiquette requires bottom posting anyway?
Probably some snob who never finished college and wears funny robes all the
time but has a long list of abbreviations after his name but doesn't
actually know how to do anything!
"RF Dude" <post@thisnewsgroup.com> wrote in message
news:_nnXe.668$0u2.258889@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Bottom posters just love to scroll down for *every* message instead of
using
> their page down button or simply clicking on the next message to see
> something new.
>...
| |
| Solar Flare 2005-09-19, 12:21 am |
| You can't read anyway Dave!
LOL
"Dave Hinz" <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:3p6jdgF889amU1@individual.net...
Not for long. <plonk> Enjoy talking to yourself.
| |
|
| Have too agree
"RF Dude" <post@thisnewsgroup.com> wrote in message
news:_nnXe.668$0u2.258889@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Bottom posters just love to scroll down for *every* message instead of
> using their page down button or simply clicking on the next message to see
> something new.
| |
| Ed Earl Ross 2005-09-19, 3:21 am |
| Vaughn wrote:
> "RF Dude" <post@thisnewsgroup.com> wrote in message
> news:_nnXe.668$0u2.258889@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
> Why do we have to discuss some iron-bound posting style as if it were some
> sort of religious principle? Why not top post, middle post, or bottom post as
> happens to be appropriate to the situation?
Agree. The important thing is to communicate effectively. A
dogmatic adherence to any style can compromise good communications,
and judicious snipping is very important.
<snip>
Note: I snipped Vaughn's comment about snipping, which makes my
comment appear as my idea. Don't snip too much--one of my pet
peeves. Sometimes I see a post that responds to something, such as
the following:
"Yes, it is false."
The only way to determine what the person means is to order the
post as a thread tree and read the previous post. I usually don't
bother, as I like to sort unread posts by date-time. However, it is
not important enough to start a religious crusade.
--
Humbly--Ed
"If the man doesn't believe as we do,
we say he is a crank, and that settles it.
I mean, it does nowadays, because now we
can't burn him." (Mark Twain)
| |
| Dean Roddey 2005-09-19, 4:21 am |
| Perhaps we could work out a compromise and everyone cold just side-post?
-------------------------------------
Dean Roddey
Chairman/CTO, Charmed Quark Systems
www.charmedquark.com
"Ed Earl Ross" <edearl@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Y3sXe.23450$S26.7508@tornado.texas.rr.com...
> Vaughn wrote:
>
> Agree. The important thing is to communicate effectively. A dogmatic
> adherence to any style can compromise good communications, and judicious
> snipping is very important.
| |
| Marc F Hult 2005-09-19, 12:21 pm |
| On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 06:59:30 GMT, "Dean Roddey" <droddey@charmedquark.com> wrote
in message <mltXe.159$9E2.53@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>:
>Perhaps we could work out a compromise and everyone cold just side-post?
Or type ^K RF Dude <CR> when in Agent newsreader, forever relegating Rude Fool
Dude to the bit-basket for disruptive, anonymous posters ;-)
Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org
| |
| Dave Hinz 2005-09-19, 12:21 pm |
| On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:17:40 GMT, Marc F Hult <MFHult@nothydrologistnot.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 06:59:30 GMT, "Dean Roddey" <droddey@charmedquark.com> wrote
> in message <mltXe.159$9E2.53@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>:
>
>
> Or type ^K RF Dude <CR> when in Agent newsreader, forever relegating Rude Fool
> Dude to the bit-basket for disruptive, anonymous posters ;-)
Yup, works great, doesn't it?
| |
| Mike Barnes 2005-09-19, 12:21 pm |
| In comp.home.automation, RF Dude wrote:
>TOP POSTERS UNITE!
Great idea!
But please do it somewhere else.
--
Mike Barnes
| |
|
| I've always top posted; there is something I believe about Outlook Express,
which I've always had, that makes bottom posting a bigger pain in the neck.
I've been online since at least 1990. There were some newsgroups where it
seemed everyone top posted so I didn't realize it was an issue.
But bottom posters seem to also be very adamant about doing it their way.
Some will put you on their blocked senders list. Some might have a
legitimate reason. Some say it's more like a conversation if you bottom
post. If I want a conversation, I'd be in a chatroom. To me, it's not a
conversation. And many don't edit out the old posts so they get to be a
mile long just to read a sentence here or there; my scrolling finger and
wrist gets achy from it all.
ares
"RF Dude" <post@thisnewsgroup.com> wrote in message
news:_nnXe.668$0u2.258889@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
| |
| Vaughn 2005-09-20, 10:21 pm |
|
"ares" <ares@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:fq1Ye.17045$zG1.12173@trnddc05...
>And many don't edit out the old posts so they get to be a
> mile long just to read a sentence here or there; my scrolling finger and
> wrist gets achy from it all.
Editing is something that cuts across posting styles. Everyone should
edit, even Top Posters.
Vaughn
| |
| Dave Hinz 2005-09-20, 10:21 pm |
| On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 00:02:19 GMT, ares <ares@verizon.net> wrote:
> I've always top posted; there is something I believe about Outlook Express,
> which I've always had, that makes bottom posting a bigger pain in the neck.
Yes, but Microsoft has never been good about following established
standards.
> I've been online since at least 1990. There were some newsgroups where it
> seemed everyone top posted so I didn't realize it was an issue.
> But bottom posters seem to also be very adamant about doing it their way.
It's more about "trim what you're not responding to", and "what the heck
about that whole article _are_ you responding to?" than anything else.
"Yes, I agree" without knowing where in the article you're agreeing,
doesn't effectively communicate your point.
> Some will put you on their blocked senders list. Some might have a
> legitimate reason. Some say it's more like a conversation if you bottom
> post. If I want a conversation, I'd be in a chatroom. To me, it's not a
> conversation.
I think you're putting more effort into this than RF Dude's troll
warrants.
| |
| Solar Flare 2005-09-21, 12:21 am |
| What no plonk this time for bottom posting?
Now you have changed your mind again and it's "trimming" that is all
important?
Attached text and references belong after the post and the headers should
stay with there posted text.
....and her comes the usual <plonk> again...LOL
"Dave Hinz" <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:3pbqa3F9hhntU1@individual.net...
It's more about "trim what you're not responding to", and "what the heck
about that whole article _are_ you responding to?" than anything else.
"Yes, I agree" without knowing where in the article you're agreeing,
doesn't effectively communicate your point.
|
|
|
|
|