On 02/01/14 14:44, Len Ovens wrote:
Bottom posting is not outdated at all, it is merely polite. On a high volume list top posting wastes the readers time. So instead of one writer taking a little more time to do things right, a large number of readers have to spend extra time flipping up and down trying to figgure our what the writer is saying. If mail clients make proper replying hard or imposible then they have a bug and should be fixed or not used. I am sure that if people started looking for another email client for their phone, google would fix theirs right away so they can continue to trace your internet tracks.... -- Len Ovens www.ovenwerks.net
There's nothing inherently polite about it at all, it's only because it's considered the norm that to do otherwise is considered impolite. Again, it's begging the question. If -- oh, happy day! -- top-posting were considered the norm, bottom-posting would be the height (or depth) of rudeness.
The theory that bottom-posting is better is highly dependent upon people trimming down previous messages and many, many people don't do that. Then there are arguments caused by people being quoted out of context. It might be a fine idea in theory, but it falls down in practice.
It's not the "proper" replying that's a problem, it's the proper reading -- every message in this thread, I've had to scroll to some degree to be able to read what people have said. Had all the message been top-posted I could have read the replies straightaway -- I don't need to read the previous message. If I were to refer back at a later date, it's no big deal to scroll down and work your way back up.
It's interesting that it's always a question of mail clients needing to be fixed or having bugs and never that, just perhaps, the idea of bottom-posting itself is what's broken.
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
