> > Top posted mails can be harder to respond to than some others. > > Since you quoted nothing from the OP, I'm guessing from clues you're > responding to me where I showed (and whooper showed it was not > meaningless) that non-top-posting, by me, is harder to read than a clearly > written top-post. > > I could refuse to listen to or respond to people with speech impediments, > who have a poor grasp of grammar, or who insist on using "you know, > like" in almost every sentence. > I could refuse to read or respond to top-posters. > I could do any number of things. > As a member of a human family, I'll do my best with what I've got... > with Groupewise 5.5, that ain't much! > > Brian Brunner > brian.t.brunner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > (610)796-5838 > No, I was complaining about Joanne Dow's rant. I'm actually quite tolerant of top posting. I prefer bottom posting. However, it can be really confusing when a thread has top, middle, and bottom postings...in some random sequence. Both you and Glenn have a reason for wanting to top post...fine. Others do it because they'd rather be different even if it is confusing. It takes all kinds! Gerry -- Shrike-list mailing list Shrike-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/shrike-list
