Bruce Hagen wrote:
Like this? Some prefer the top, others prefer the bottom. I top post,
but this will be debated as long as there are newsgroups. The most
important thing when you have a problem, is to include replies to
previous messages so we know what has been suggested and tried.

"Don W." wrote in message
...
Is it possible top post to replies in OE 6?

Don

Top posting severely handy caps the posts when read from archive as in a
book or newspaper. One likes to read from top to bottom in order or posts
like paragraphs. If the posts are out of order it is almost impossible to
follow. It is not a matter of personal preference it is a matter of common
sense and order. Now if someone can point out a flaw in this explanation
then I am waiting. Otherwise the top posters will still remain lame and
ignorant.

"Lame and ignorant?" Why not prejudicial and hidebound? Once you stoop to
name calling, all is fair game. Why not try to be tolerant, or did no one
teach you that when you were young? New Hampshire used to be a area of
politeness but it seems that it's no longer such. Too bad.
--
Jim Pickering, MVP, Outlook Express
https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pr...8-1171988A62D6
Please deliver feedback to the newsgroup, so that others can be helped.
Thanks.


"George Forum" wrote in message
...

Top posting severely handy caps the posts when read from archive as in a
book or newspaper. One likes to read from top to bottom in order or posts
like paragraphs. If the posts are out of order it is almost impossible to
follow. It is not a matter of personal preference it is a matter of common
sense and order. Now if someone can point out a flaw in this explanation
then I am waiting. Otherwise the top posters will still remain lame and
ignorant.

the flawin your rant is that posts are not intended to be read as a book
the original posts were read by the poster when they were typed
answers append in order in the tree of replies
top posted is more logical as the messages opens with the cursor at the top
removing the requirement to find the start of the relevant answer
--
-
Adaware http://www.lavasoft.de
spybot http://security.kolla.de
AVG free antivirus http://www.grisoft.com
Etrust/Vet/CA.online Antivirus scan
http://www3.ca.com/securityadvisor/virusinfo/scan.aspx
Panda online AntiVirus scan http://www.activescan.com
Panda online AntiSpyware Scan
http://www.pandasoftware.com/virus_info/spyware/test/
Catalog of removal tools (1)
http://www.pandasoftware.com/download/utilities/
Catalog of removal tools (2)
http://www3.ca.com/securityadvisor/n...aspx?CID=40387
Trouble Shooting guide to Windows http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/
Blocking Unwanted Parasites with a Hosts file
http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
links provided as a courtesy, read all instructions on the pages before
use
Grateful thanks to the authors/webmasters
_
"George Forum" wrote in message
...


Bruce Hagen wrote:
Like this? Some prefer the top, others prefer the bottom. I top post,
but this will be debated as long as there are newsgroups. The most
important thing when you have a problem, is to include replies to
previous messages so we know what has been suggested and tried.

"Don W." wrote in message
...
Is it possible top post to replies in OE 6?

Don

Top posting severely handy caps the posts when read from archive as in a
book or newspaper. One likes to read from top to bottom in order or posts
like paragraphs. If the posts are out of order it is almost impossible to
follow. It is not a matter of personal preference it is a matter of common
sense and order. Now if someone can point out a flaw in this explanation
then I am waiting. Otherwise the top posters will still remain lame and
ignorant.

On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 19:49:22 -0400, AlmostBob wrote:

the flawin your rant is that posts are not intended to be read as a book
the original posts were read by the poster when they were typed
answers append in order in the tree of replies
top posted is more logical as the messages opens with the cursor at the top
removing the requirement to find the start of the relevant answer

That presumes that the reader has followed the thread from the beginning.
Late comers, in order to grasp the context, have to skip to the first post,
then read down, then jump up to the first reply, then read down, then jump
up to the next reply, then read down, ad infinitum. I have been known to
skip such screwy threads as they tend to be incomprehensible. They are
certainly not logically laid out.

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

You missed the point, the post and thread are to the benefit of the OP, not
to the benefit of any blow in
Usenet is not designed to be read as a book
--
-
Adaware http://www.lavasoft.de
spybot http://security.kolla.de
AVG free antivirus http://www.grisoft.com
Etrust/Vet/CA.online Antivirus scan
http://www3.ca.com/securityadvisor/virusinfo/scan.aspx
Panda online AntiVirus scan http://www.activescan.com
Panda online AntiSpyware Scan
http://www.pandasoftware.com/virus_info/spyware/test/
Catalog of removal tools (1)
http://www.pandasoftware.com/download/utilities/
Catalog of removal tools (2)
http://www3.ca.com/securityadvisor/n...aspx?CID=40387
Trouble Shooting guide to Windows http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/
Blocking Unwanted Parasites with a Hosts file
http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
links provided as a courtesy, read all instructions on the pages before
use
Grateful thanks to the authors/webmasters
_
"N. Miller" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 19:49:22 -0400, AlmostBob wrote:

the flawin your rant is that posts are not intended to be read as a book
the original posts were read by the poster when they were typed
answers append in order in the tree of replies
top posted is more logical as the messages opens with the cursor at the
top
removing the requirement to find the start of the relevant answer

That presumes that the reader has followed the thread from the beginning.
Late comers, in order to grasp the context, have to skip to the first
post,
then read down, then jump up to the first reply, then read down, then jump
up to the next reply, then read down, ad infinitum. I have been known to
skip such screwy threads as they tend to be incomprehensible. They are
certainly not logically laid out.

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 06:12:31 -0400, AlmostBob wrote:

You missed the point, the post and thread are to the benefit of the OP, not
to the benefit of any blow in
Usenet is not designed to be read as a book

Don't think so. Top posting, or bottom posting; each is a convention.
Bottom posting is as old as the Usenet; older than Microsoft even.

Top posting is as old as business correspondence; also older than
Microsoft.

Top posting works well in a one-to-one correspondence, where somebody posts
a message, and somebody responds. It works in help forums, as this one,
because most threads are only two to four responses deep. It fares poorly
when there are multiple participants in a thread.

Bottom posting is more appropriate to discussion threads, with multiple
participants. Such threads can run two dozen messages deep, or more.
Somebody joining such a thread six messages into it has no context; a
newcomer needs to read the thread as a book, and the Usenet _was_ designed
with just that in mind, in order to get up to speed on the subject under
discussion.

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

George

You bandy 'lame and ignorant' around as if you were well acquainted.. I will
not argue that point..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/User


"George Forum" wrote in message
...


Bruce Hagen wrote:
Like this? Some prefer the top, others prefer the bottom. I top post,
but this will be debated as long as there are newsgroups. The most
important thing when you have a problem, is to include replies to
previous messages so we know what has been suggested and tried.

"Don W." wrote in message
...
Is it possible top post to replies in OE 6?

Don

Top posting severely handy caps the posts when read from archive as in a
book or newspaper. One likes to read from top to bottom in order or posts
like paragraphs. If the posts are out of order it is almost impossible to
follow. It is not a matter of personal preference it is a matter of common
sense and order. Now if someone can point out a flaw in this explanation
then I am waiting. Otherwise the top posters will still remain lame and
ignorant.

Perhaps you need to remember that you're asserting a point of view which
favors your own habits; others may have equally strong feelings in the other
direction supporting their own convenience. If you wish to archive without
such a difficulty, or perhaps, less of it, archive from Google groups--most
of the time they attempt to make the prior posts available at a click.

Joe
"George Forum" wrote in message
...


Bruce Hagen wrote:
Like this? Some prefer the top, others prefer the bottom. I top post,
but this will be debated as long as there are newsgroups. The most
important thing when you have a problem, is to include replies to
previous messages so we know what has been suggested and tried.

"Don W." wrote in message
...
Is it possible top post to replies in OE 6?

Don

Top posting severely handy caps the posts when read from archive as in a
book or newspaper. One likes to read from top to bottom in order or posts
like paragraphs. If the posts are out of order it is almost impossible to
follow. It is not a matter of personal preference it is a matter of common
sense and order. Now if someone can point out a flaw in this explanation
then I am waiting. Otherwise the top posters will still remain lame and
ignorant.

"George Forum" wrote in message ...


Bruce Hagen wrote:
Like this? Some prefer the top, others prefer the bottom. I top post,
but this will be debated as long as there are newsgroups. The most
important thing when you have a problem, is to include replies to
previous messages so we know what has been suggested and tried.

"Don W." wrote in message
...
Is it possible top post to replies in OE 6?

Don

Top posting severely handy caps the posts when read from archive as in a
book or newspaper. One likes to read from top to bottom in order or posts
like paragraphs. If the posts are out of order it is almost impossible to
follow. It is not a matter of personal preference it is a matter of common
sense and order. Now if someone can point out a flaw in this explanation
then I am waiting. Otherwise the top posters will still remain lame and
ignorant.




There are many different ways to reply to a message, and there is no set rule on how to post. It really depends on the message context.

steve

"Steve Cochran" wrote in message ...

"George Forum" wrote in message ...


Bruce Hagen wrote:
Like this? Some prefer the top, others prefer the bottom. I top post,
but this will be debated as long as there are newsgroups. The most
important thing when you have a problem, is to include replies to
previous messages so we know what has been suggested and tried.

"Don W." wrote in message
...
Is it possible top post to replies in OE 6?

Don

Top posting severely handy caps the posts when read from archive as in a
book or newspaper. One likes to read from top to bottom in order or posts
like paragraphs. If the posts are out of order it is almost impossible to
follow. It is not a matter of personal preference it is a matter of common
sense and order. Now if someone can point out a flaw in this explanation
then I am waiting. Otherwise the top posters will still remain lame and
ignorant.




There are many different ways to reply to a message, and there is no set rule on how to post. It really depends on the message context.

steve

Of course, no one who's set to Read in Plain text will get the joke.

Frank