After years of reading and writing messages on Usenet and other public forums, I'll take top posting any day, unless there is value to be gained from interspersed posting. When I look at a message thread, I want the latest message right there at the top where I can quickly see it without having to scroll down and look for it. Of course, this being a Linux list, I'm probably the odd man out. When I see a message that is bottom posted and has so much text that it fills my default sized text window (meaning I have to scroll down to see what the latest comments are) I usually skip over it and don't read it. I don't have time to scroll down a bazillion messages to see the most current bottom posted comments. Yeah, yeah, proper bottom posted messages will not fill my text window because the poster properly removed the irrelevant text. This, unfortunately, rarely happens. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Wildberger" <wildberger@xxxxxxxxx> To: <wine-users@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 6:43 AM Subject: Re: OT: TOP or BOTTOM posts ;-) Re: [Wine]Tracktion > It all boils down to a question of common sense. If a comment is made to the > subject line in general, TOP POSTING is the better way. I f the comment is > made to specific points, then INTERSPERSED POSTING is preferred. If a > comment is made to the overall context, then BOTTOM POSTING *might* be > better. > Bottom postings are *most annoying* when responding to a longwinded text by > just saying one or two words, or a short sentence with little or no > substance. People who insist of applying fixed rules are usually laking > common sense. But as always, there are exceptions :-) > John > <snip> _______________________________________________ wine-users mailing list wine-users@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wine-users
