Dave Milne

But not required by RFC 1855.
--
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"Shaggie" <blah@blah.com> wrote in message
news:s0qba05imj7vsg6sv0voo0dicjtb3eqlld@4ax.com...

> It's also proper newsgroup etiquette to not top-post... Personally I
> don't always agree with that and I know there are frequent holy wars
> waged over top vs bottom posting but the "general rule" is that
> top-posting is in bad form. Just figured I'd throw that in while
> we're in "lecture mode." :-)

> >> No offense, but you might want to learn how to thread newsgroup
messages...
> >> Then you wouldn't have to waste bandwidth and storage space by
uselessly
> >> quoting people...
>

But not required by RFC 1855.

Shaggie

On Sat, 15 May 2004 10:16:14 GMT, "Dave Milne"
<jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote:

>But not required by RFC 1855.

Not required, true. But... search that rfc for "top" and you'll find
under the general guidelines section:

<snip>
- 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...
<snip>

If you summarize the original at the top then there is no way to
top-post... So the general guideline is to NOT top-post. There is no
arguing that point, and before you reply, keep in mind that it was you
who brought up that rfc...

--

Less drivel, more Dremel.

Shaggie

On Sat, 15 May 2004 10:16:14 GMT, "Dave Milne"
<jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote:

>But not required by RFC 1855.

Not required, true. But... search that rfc for "top" and you'll find
under the general guidelines section:

<snip>
- 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...
<snip>

If you summarize the original at the top then there is no way to
top-post... So the general guideline is to NOT top-post. There is no
arguing that point, and before you reply, keep in mind that it was you
who brought up that rfc...

--

Less drivel, more Dremel.

Shaggie

On Sat, 15 May 2004 10:16:14 GMT, "Dave Milne"
<jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote:

>But not required by RFC 1855.

Not required, true. But... search that rfc for "top" and you'll find
under the general guidelines section:

<snip>
- 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...
<snip>

If you summarize the original at the top then there is no way to
top-post... So the general guideline is to NOT top-post. There is no
arguing that point, and before you reply, keep in mind that it was you
who brought up that rfc...

--

Less drivel, more Dremel.

Shaggie

On Sat, 15 May 2004 10:16:14 GMT, "Dave Milne"
<jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote:

>But not required by RFC 1855.

Not required, true. But... search that rfc for "top" and you'll find
under the general guidelines section:

<snip>
- 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...
<snip>

If you summarize the original at the top then there is no way to
top-post... So the general guideline is to NOT top-post. There is no
arguing that point, and before you reply, keep in mind that it was you
who brought up that rfc...

--

Less drivel, more Dremel.

Jo

"It's also proper newsgroup etiquette to not top-post"
I'd say that this would be hotly contested...

Shaggie wrote:

> On Fri, 14 May 2004 20:30:37 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
>
>>I view messages by date/time posted, not by the thread. Viewing by
>>thread takes 'way' too much time.
>>
>>It 'is' proper newsgroup etiquette to give folks at least half a clue
>>what you are talking about.
>>
>>Useless stuff should be snipped agreed, but your last post right out of
>>the blue made no sense at all if I just viewed it..
>>
>>Now if you want replies in the context given by you, I will have some
>>great fun with you...
>>;-)
>>
>>Mike
>
>
> It's also proper newsgroup etiquette to not top-post... Personally I
> don't always agree with that and I know there are frequent holy wars
> waged over top vs bottom posting but the "general rule" is that
> top-posting is in bad form. Just figured I'd throw that in while
> we're in "lecture mode." :-)
>
>
>>Daniel Melameth wrote:
>>
>>>Mike,
>>>
>>>No offense, but you might want to learn how to thread newsgroup messages...
>>>Then you wouldn't have to waste bandwidth and storage space by uselessly
>>>quoting people...
>
>
> --
>
> Less drivel, more Dremel.

Jo

"It's also proper newsgroup etiquette to not top-post"
I'd say that this would be hotly contested...

Shaggie wrote:

> On Fri, 14 May 2004 20:30:37 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
>
>>I view messages by date/time posted, not by the thread. Viewing by
>>thread takes 'way' too much time.
>>
>>It 'is' proper newsgroup etiquette to give folks at least half a clue
>>what you are talking about.
>>
>>Useless stuff should be snipped agreed, but your last post right out of
>>the blue made no sense at all if I just viewed it..
>>
>>Now if you want replies in the context given by you, I will have some
>>great fun with you...
>>;-)
>>
>>Mike
>
>
> It's also proper newsgroup etiquette to not top-post... Personally I
> don't always agree with that and I know there are frequent holy wars
> waged over top vs bottom posting but the "general rule" is that
> top-posting is in bad form. Just figured I'd throw that in while
> we're in "lecture mode." :-)
>
>
>>Daniel Melameth wrote:
>>
>>>Mike,
>>>
>>>No offense, but you might want to learn how to thread newsgroup messages...
>>>Then you wouldn't have to waste bandwidth and storage space by uselessly
>>>quoting people...
>
>
> --
>
> Less drivel, more Dremel.

Jo

"It's also proper newsgroup etiquette to not top-post"
I'd say that this would be hotly contested...

Shaggie wrote:

> On Fri, 14 May 2004 20:30:37 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
>
>>I view messages by date/time posted, not by the thread. Viewing by
>>thread takes 'way' too much time.
>>
>>It 'is' proper newsgroup etiquette to give folks at least half a clue
>>what you are talking about.
>>
>>Useless stuff should be snipped agreed, but your last post right out of
>>the blue made no sense at all if I just viewed it..
>>
>>Now if you want replies in the context given by you, I will have some
>>great fun with you...
>>;-)
>>
>>Mike
>
>
> It's also proper newsgroup etiquette to not top-post... Personally I
> don't always agree with that and I know there are frequent holy wars
> waged over top vs bottom posting but the "general rule" is that
> top-posting is in bad form. Just figured I'd throw that in while
> we're in "lecture mode." :-)
>
>
>>Daniel Melameth wrote:
>>
>>>Mike,
>>>
>>>No offense, but you might want to learn how to thread newsgroup messages...
>>>Then you wouldn't have to waste bandwidth and storage space by uselessly
>>>quoting people...
>
>
> --
>
> Less drivel, more Dremel.

Jo

"It's also proper newsgroup etiquette to not top-post"
I'd say that this would be hotly contested...

Shaggie wrote:

> On Fri, 14 May 2004 20:30:37 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
>
>>I view messages by date/time posted, not by the thread. Viewing by
>>thread takes 'way' too much time.
>>
>>It 'is' proper newsgroup etiquette to give folks at least half a clue
>>what you are talking about.
>>
>>Useless stuff should be snipped agreed, but your last post right out of
>>the blue made no sense at all if I just viewed it..
>>
>>Now if you want replies in the context given by you, I will have some
>>great fun with you...
>>;-)
>>
>>Mike
>
>
> It's also proper newsgroup etiquette to not top-post... Personally I
> don't always agree with that and I know there are frequent holy wars
> waged over top vs bottom posting but the "general rule" is that
> top-posting is in bad form. Just figured I'd throw that in while
> we're in "lecture mode." :-)
>
>
>>Daniel Melameth wrote:
>>
>>>Mike,
>>>
>>>No offense, but you might want to learn how to thread newsgroup messages...
>>>Then you wouldn't have to waste bandwidth and storage space by uselessly
>>>quoting people...
>
>
> --
>
> Less drivel, more Dremel.

Shaggie

On Sat, 15 May 2004 12:48:21 GMT, Jo <jo_ratner@NOSPAMyahoo.com>
wrote:

>"It's also proper newsgroup etiquette to not top-post"
>I'd say that this would be hotly contested...

Which is why I said: "... I know there are frequent holy wars waged
over top vs bottom posting but..."

--

Less drivel, more Dremel.
Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite,
and furthermore always carry a small snake.
- W.C. Fields