Get rid of Quicken

So what is this top post thing and your note about cleaning up usegroups?

Read this concerning top posting:

Personally, I prefer bottom-posting.

But if I come across a thread that's been top-posted, I'll certainly follow that preference.

There's nothing more difficult than trying to follow a discussion that's both top-posted *and* bottom-posted.

Notan

"Why should I have to scroll down past all the text I've already read in multiple conversations in a single thread? If you continue to waste people's time by bottom posting, I'll be forced to kill file you."

It's sarcasim. There's no "standard" (who would be the 'certify> "JACL" wrote:

Agree. Switching back and forth makes reading a thread difficult.

It also depends on the nature of the newsgroup. Several groups that I read follow the bottom posting only mentality. For two others it is mostly top posting so one needs to be flexible.

It also depends on the software client being used. OE only top-posts so one needs to make a conscious effort to switch to bottom posting. I like TB which allows me to specify top or bottom posting by news server.

There is a standard, GNSKA.

Ooops, finger hiccup! GNKSA of course.

What does this have to do with top or bottom posting?

Doesn't really matter (by the way, I also prefer bottom posting, but it's an individual's preference.) In my book, a 'standard' is some generally accepted (if not, governmental agency) that has perhaps regulatory power of enforcing. Bottom or top posting is one of these issues (like issues dealing with sex, money, and politics) that are primarily individualistic in nature and one can't argue any particular point of view of being right.

This ship has already sailed. It's personal preference, end of story. I'm not about to try to tell anyone they're right or wrong. Of course, XS11E certainly has the right to killfille anyone he or she chooses.

OK. I now understand top and bottom posting. Personally, I would rather have top posting but on a scale of 1-10, that would be a six weight. Slightly better than no opinion. Time for my coin toss app.

"Mr.Jan" wrote in news:0c8cdde4-a460-415c-8f9b- snipped-for-privacy@y2g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

I like top reply in emails, because I assume that the original sender knows what was sent to me, so a sequential top to bottom read isn't useful.

In the case of usenet posts, Many people might not have seen the posts I am replying to, so a sequential top to bottom read might be useful. Of course, snipping unnecessary "stuff" is a good thing?

?Hi, Han.

replying to, so a sequential top to bottom read might be useful.

Aye, and there's the rub...or however that phrase goes. I never was good with Shakespeare - or whoever.

"Many people" have not seen the conversation to date, but many of us HAVE - and are bored and irritated with having to scroll through them all again.

I try not to get into the "religious wars" about top/bottom posting, because I think it really depends much more on the READER than the POSTER of the messages. So I'll make one comment and then shut up.

When I'm reading a new (to me) newsgroup, trying to catch up, it's good (for me) if the first message I see in each thread has been consistently bottom-posted. I can just read the whole story to date, top to bottom. ;

Well put!

Notan

"R. C. White" wrote in news:jeSdnSgkNIjElkXRnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@posted.grandecom:

While I agree with your reasoning, RC, I like to stay with the convention most often used in the newsgroup. I just wish that sniping was more seriously practiced by most others (you do a great job!).

Now for my question to you: Was there a reason to preface your "Hi, Han." with a question mark? If so, I didn't get that .

Also, I'm no good with Shakespeare, so that reference went by me. I know about the "rub" though, ... As far as Shakespeare is concerned, I had the great foortune to see a play in the theatre in Stratford-upon-Avon, and was very happily surprised that in large part due to the excellent acting, I was able to follow the play. That probably would not have happened with a play in my native language, by the Dutch sort of contemporaryof Shakespeare, Vondel. Old Dutch is very much more different from contemporary language than English.

Why should you have to scroll?

?Hi, Han.

You'll probably see the leading question mark on this message, too. I'm not putting it there. It's a bug in either Windows Live Mail 2011, or in the Internet Explorer 9 beta - or both - or in the combination of the two. It's not just me (or you); it happens to just about everybody running that combination of software. We hope it will stop happening when IE9 goes RTW, Real Soon Now. ;^}

RC

"R. C. White" wrote in news:bsOdncAtAeIi90XRnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@posted.grandecom:

Okidokie! I was surmising it was something inadvertent.

?Hi, XS11E.

If there are more than a page or so of quoted messages, and if the most-recent poster bottom-posted, then I'll have to scroll down through the prior posts to see those final comments.

As I said, If I'm arriving late to an already-long thread, then it's natural to scroll through them, top to bottom, reading the most-recent post at the bottom. But, after I've read that initial - for me - introduction to the thread, then I don't want to scroll through the earlier ones again and again in each subsequent post in the thread. And if I'm reading a dozen posts in a top-posted thread, it's easier to U to the next reply and read the most-recent comments at the top - then U again...lather, rinse, repeat... ;

Han wrote in news:Xns9E2A58FDEADAFikkezelf@216.151.153.166:

If you ever accessed Usenet in the old days, using a non-GUI interface, back in the UNIX period, everything was bottom posted for you because one did not have the luxury of scrolling up and down in the message, It dispkayed at the bottom and a new line pushed everything up a line so that when you saw the post and were ready to reply, it was tacked on to the end of the previous post.

You guys with the GUI interfaces, don't you have an END key you can press before entering your reply ?

I think of a Usenet message with its replies like a book in progress. One does not add on to a book beginning at page 1, but at the end.

You newcomers, you are something else!!