J
J
John Vinson
It was customary on ARPANet back when that consisted of twelve
university computers too.
John W. Vinson[MVP]
T
Terry Kreft
LOL! you got me, I didn't notice the cross-posting.
Trouble is once you start replying to a crosspost it's difficult to stop as
you don't know where people are replying from.
Trouble is once you start replying to a crosspost it's difficult to stop as
you don't know where people are replying from.
T
Terry Kreft
I thought it was covet your neighbours wife, but times change I suppose, if
you want to hide your neighbours wife then you go for it Trevor!
you want to hide your neighbours wife then you go for it Trevor!
T
Terry Kreft
It was <g>.
D
Darryl Kerkeslager
John Vinson said:
Omigod say it ain't so! FidoNet, yes, but ARPANet!?! I thought you people
were part of the Great Generation that was all gone <g>
Darryl Kerkeslager
R
Rick Brandt
Tony said:
As with most things in life context has a lot to do with it (IMO). *Discussion*
groups with threads that go on and on (and on) should most definitely impose a
bottom-post-only protocol otherwise it's a nightmare.
One must always remember that the way *your* newsreader presents a thread to
*you* is not how it is presented to everyone else. The attitude of "If someone
wants to see what I am talking about they can look at previous posts" doesn't
cut it. A post should make (some) sense all by itself.
In *technical* groups where a question is asked and answered it simply doesn't
make enough difference to get worked up about, but I still bottom post (mostly)
because you never know when a thread will turn into a discussion.
R
Ruben Baumann
Whether one top-posts or bottom-posts - - - just simply isn't that
important!
This is one of those petty little arguments that people start when it's a
slow news day, or they got out of bed on wrong side, or they're trying to
intimidate someone new to the group.
Look, what's really important is that when replying to a post, is that one
follows the preference of the majority of the newsgroup one is participating
in.
The majority for the newsgroup, comp.databases.ms-access, MOSTLY top-posts,
so there I generally top-post. The majority for the newsgroup
comp.lang.python bottom-posts, so there I bottom-post. When joining a
group, I usually lurk around long enough to find out what the majority
prefers, and develop a feel for group, then I just follow along. No biggy.
I don't have a preference either way; it's not that important to me. What
DOES irritate me, A LOT, is when replies include EVERY single previous reply
in the thread. This isn't context, this is waste of my time trying to find
out whether the reply-ee has anything important to add to the discussion, or
just feeding his/her ego with a long, long, long, etc., etc., etc. post.
I do appreciate those people who intersperse their replies when appropriate,
especially when responding to individual points in the post. Some people
even go so far as to break this type of post into several smaller posts when
replying. Sometimes this is good, sometimes not.
The thing is, I appreciate all the answers and the help given by the
responders, and in the end, that's all that matters.
Ruben
important!
This is one of those petty little arguments that people start when it's a
slow news day, or they got out of bed on wrong side, or they're trying to
intimidate someone new to the group.
Look, what's really important is that when replying to a post, is that one
follows the preference of the majority of the newsgroup one is participating
in.
The majority for the newsgroup, comp.databases.ms-access, MOSTLY top-posts,
so there I generally top-post. The majority for the newsgroup
comp.lang.python bottom-posts, so there I bottom-post. When joining a
group, I usually lurk around long enough to find out what the majority
prefers, and develop a feel for group, then I just follow along. No biggy.
I don't have a preference either way; it's not that important to me. What
DOES irritate me, A LOT, is when replies include EVERY single previous reply
in the thread. This isn't context, this is waste of my time trying to find
out whether the reply-ee has anything important to add to the discussion, or
just feeding his/her ego with a long, long, long, etc., etc., etc. post.
I do appreciate those people who intersperse their replies when appropriate,
especially when responding to individual points in the post. Some people
even go so far as to break this type of post into several smaller posts when
replying. Sometimes this is good, sometimes not.
The thing is, I appreciate all the answers and the help given by the
responders, and in the end, that's all that matters.
Ruben
J
John Vinson
<rapping my cane on the floor> Hey you young whippersnapper, let's
have some respect for your elders here! <g>
John W. Vinson[MVP]
B
Bob Quintal
Lyn,
RFC1855: Netiquette Guidelines,
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html, mandates
bottom-posting.
"If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure
you summarize
the original at the top of the message, or include just enough
text of the original to give a context.
Whether one top-posts or bottom-posts - - - just simply isn't
that important!
This is one of those petty little arguments that people start
when it's a slow news day, or they got out of bed on wrong
side, or they're trying to intimidate someone new to the
group.
Look, what's really important is that when replying to a post,
is that one follows the preference of the majority of the
newsgroup one is participating in.
Maybe it's not important to you. My time is precious to me. I
use a reader that shows messages in a treeview. By simply
clicking on the leaf node of a thread, I can get all the
information out of the thread that's relevant, but only if the
quotations have been judiciously snipped, and the responses are
bottom posted.
I don't accept your comment about the majourity of this group's
replies being top posted. That is not the case.
[remainder snipped]
L
Larry Linson
"Trevor Best" wrote
As I understand it, the political party to which you subscribe may have some
bearing on this.
I'd suggest you wait and do so on a day when you haven't first posted your
intention on the Internet. Even if the Commandment does not apply, there are
laws against it in every jurisdiction where I have ever visited. And, over
here, they are decidedly "Old-Testmentish" in many of the States.
There's a lot of "coveting" going on, but you may have a real point about
the "covert" part -- especially if the neighbor is bigger and tougher than
you are!
As I understand it, the political party to which you subscribe may have some
bearing on this.
I'd suggest you wait and do so on a day when you haven't first posted your
intention on the Internet. Even if the Commandment does not apply, there are
laws against it in every jurisdiction where I have ever visited. And, over
here, they are decidedly "Old-Testmentish" in many of the States.
There's a lot of "coveting" going on, but you may have a real point about
the "covert" part -- especially if the neighbor is bigger and tougher than
you are!
D
Dirk Goldgar
Larry Linson said:
Just be sure that, no matter how much you covet her, you don't cover her
unless you do it covertly.
J
John Mishefske
P
Penguin
Does anyone remember the original question? Opps...
Does anyone remember the original question?
Does anyone remember the original question?
D
David Schofield
Hi
If we all used tree-view readers like Google's we wouldn't need to
quote any of the original posts at all and most threads would fit on
one screen!
David
If we all used tree-view readers like Google's we wouldn't need to
quote any of the original posts at all and most threads would fit on
one screen!
David
D
Darryl Kerkeslager
David Schofield said:
What Google are you using? When I look in Google there is no tree view as
of a month or so ago.
Darryl Kerkeslager
R
Ruben Baumann
Your right Bob, it's not that important to ME!, and yes, my time is
important too.
I do however, appreciate your reply.
The only thing of real importance to me is, do I get the answers I need when
I ask questions, and do I get useful information from the other questions
asked and answered in the ng. That's all that matters to me.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion on this. I have to admit
"majority" is a probably a wrong choice of word here, but just browsing
through todays replies indicates that some people top-posted, some
bottom-posted, and it doesn't matter to me at all which way they did it,
just that I gleaned some useful info.
This is a religious, almost fanatical, issue for some, and fanaticism
regarding THIS issue, is a real issue for ME. Perhaps some day, I'll be
fanatical about how I and others post...but not this day. Call me heretic.
<G>
Ruben Baumann
D
David Schofield
Hi
does this work? Google hadn't yet got your post
http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?h...oups?hl=en&lr=&group=comp.databases.ms-access
I normally use free agent for posting but find google is much easier
for reading huge threads like this one (how pathetic that I have
nothing better to do!)
David
T
Trevor Best
Larry said:
Yup, those laws are still older than Usenet guidelines though
Actually under British law, I can kill someone abroad and be safe if I
make it back here (unless the authorities here grant extradition)
although if I was to kill another Briton abroad I can be prosecuted for
it back in Britain.
Well you have to be covert about these things anyway, there is a fox
hole under the fence anyway
T
Trevor Best
Dirk said:
Whipped cream or peanut butter?