To All Newsgroup Posters - Configuration of Replies

There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.

One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.

The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
when you continually follow a thread.

When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have
to spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.

I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have
to scroll down. This made the most sense.

I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that
I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of uniformity.

And the flood gates shall open and the torrent shall enshew. God bless
Usenet!


"measekite" wrote in message
. ..
There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.

One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.

The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
when you continually follow a thread.

When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have
to spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.

I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have
to scroll down. This made the most sense.

I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that
I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of uniformity.


And the flood gates shall open and the torrent shall enshew. God bless
Usenet!

I actually prefer top-posting (and am doing so here because that is also
your preference). However, most of the responses I have seen to this type
of message on other newsgroups indicate a preference for bottom-posting.
Therefore, this has become my "style": (1) I usually bottom-post, with
selective snipping, if no one has previously top-posted; (2) If top-posting
has occurred first, then I follow suit; (3) I will occasionally interleave
responses within a message (leaving the marker to indicate messages from
previous readers). I agree that it is a real annoyance to have to
continually scroll down to the bottom, especially if it is a long message
and there has been no attempt to reduce the length by snipping.

MaryL


"measekite" wrote in message
. ..
There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and all
newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally and
that makes it difficult to read longer threads.

One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.

The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
when you continually follow a thread.

When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have to
spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.

I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have to
scroll down. This made the most sense.

I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that I
at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of uniformity.

"I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of
uniformity."

Dream On.... )

(Posted again at the end for bottom feeders..)

"measekite" wrote in message
. ..
There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and all
newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally and
that makes it difficult to read longer threads.

One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.

The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
when you continually follow a thread.

When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have to
spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.

I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have to
scroll down. This made the most sense.

I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that I
at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of uniformity.

"I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of
uniformity."

Dream On... )

(Posted again at the top for the other 50%..)

In article ,
says...
There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.

Here we go again...

BTW, there is an RFC that states the correct method is bottom-posting.
SO, it's an internet standard. This is usually only an issue with
those that are new to usenet. Once you have tried to sort out what
someone is replying to a few thousand times, you'll learn as well.

Further, top-posters seem to be extremely taken with not snipping
any text below their reply, a horrible waste of bandwidth, not
to mention making it even more difficult to determine specifically
what they are responding to in the original.

Kibo informs me that measekite stated that:

One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.

The correct, more considerate method is to snip out all of the text in
the original post, except for the part that you're actually responding
to - just as I've done in this post. It's also the traditional Usenet
format, because it makes conversations easier to follow, both at the
time, & later on.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Kibo informs me that "MaryL" -OUT-THE-LITTER
stated that:

I actually prefer top-posting (and am doing so here because that is also
your preference). However, most of the responses I have seen to this type
of message on other newsgroups indicate a preference for bottom-posting.
Therefore, this has become my "style": (1) I usually bottom-post, with
selective snipping,

That is very well-mannered of you.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

There are two ways to configure your software for replies
on this and all newsgroups.
What software are you assuming that I am using?

I use Microsoft Outlook Express. I am prepared to be told that I am
mistaken but I cannot see any way to affect whether my replies appear before
or after earlier responses.

Regards
Keith

Randy Howard wrote:
In article ,
says...
There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about
equally and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.

Here we go again...

BTW, there is an RFC that states the correct method is bottom-posting.
SO, it's an internet standard.

Can you provide a reference for that RFC, please?
I briefly looked for one when the question was first asked, but I couldn't
find one.

David

ROFL

"Ryadia" wrote in message
...
And the flood gates shall open and the torrent shall enshew. God bless
Usenet!


"measekite" wrote in message
. ..
There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.

One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.

The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
when you continually follow a thread.

When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have
to spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.

I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have
to scroll down. This made the most sense.

I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that
I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of
uniformity.


And the flood gates shall open and the torrent shall enshew. God bless
Usenet!