question on jeep dealer refusing service.
Guest
Posts: n/a
On posting style WAS: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
I was too broke for the Timex and never got around to Commies or CoCos.
My first home box was 286, but I cobbled up a 10MHz 8088 (with the V20
refit), a 20MB ST-225 and a Prometheus 1200bps (soon replaced by a USR
Sportster) to serve as a platform for my barefoot OPUS BBS in the
late-80s.
I'm using Procomm 2.4.2 right now. It does just what I want it to, every
time.
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, L.W.([iso-8859-1] ßill) ------ III wrote:
> Yes, I had the English Timex Simclair in '82, then our Commodore
> 64, but they couldn't network. That came in '85 for me with this IBM PC
> clone, Kay Pro 4 MHz and 300 baud modem:
> http://www.----------.com/KayPro.jpg and a program like ProComm:
> http://www.----------.com/procomm.htm to call our friends down the
> block.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > Not sure what you mean by "newbie." My first computer was a Timex Simclair
> > 1000, and I fist had access to BBSs with a Vic 20 -- I had to load the
> > modem software with a tape drive. I have been building computers and
> > setting up networks since the 80s. Top posting is confuing as hell. The
> > proper was to post is to cut the extranious stuff out of the message and
> > respond under what's left. http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
> > http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
On posting style WAS: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
I was too broke for the Timex and never got around to Commies or CoCos.
My first home box was 286, but I cobbled up a 10MHz 8088 (with the V20
refit), a 20MB ST-225 and a Prometheus 1200bps (soon replaced by a USR
Sportster) to serve as a platform for my barefoot OPUS BBS in the
late-80s.
I'm using Procomm 2.4.2 right now. It does just what I want it to, every
time.
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, L.W.([iso-8859-1] ßill) ------ III wrote:
> Yes, I had the English Timex Simclair in '82, then our Commodore
> 64, but they couldn't network. That came in '85 for me with this IBM PC
> clone, Kay Pro 4 MHz and 300 baud modem:
> http://www.----------.com/KayPro.jpg and a program like ProComm:
> http://www.----------.com/procomm.htm to call our friends down the
> block.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > Not sure what you mean by "newbie." My first computer was a Timex Simclair
> > 1000, and I fist had access to BBSs with a Vic 20 -- I had to load the
> > modem software with a tape drive. I have been building computers and
> > setting up networks since the 80s. Top posting is confuing as hell. The
> > proper was to post is to cut the extranious stuff out of the message and
> > respond under what's left. http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
> > http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
On posting style WAS: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
I was too broke for the Timex and never got around to Commies or CoCos.
My first home box was 286, but I cobbled up a 10MHz 8088 (with the V20
refit), a 20MB ST-225 and a Prometheus 1200bps (soon replaced by a USR
Sportster) to serve as a platform for my barefoot OPUS BBS in the
late-80s.
I'm using Procomm 2.4.2 right now. It does just what I want it to, every
time.
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, L.W.([iso-8859-1] ßill) ------ III wrote:
> Yes, I had the English Timex Simclair in '82, then our Commodore
> 64, but they couldn't network. That came in '85 for me with this IBM PC
> clone, Kay Pro 4 MHz and 300 baud modem:
> http://www.----------.com/KayPro.jpg and a program like ProComm:
> http://www.----------.com/procomm.htm to call our friends down the
> block.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:--------------------
>
> Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > Not sure what you mean by "newbie." My first computer was a Timex Simclair
> > 1000, and I fist had access to BBSs with a Vic 20 -- I had to load the
> > modem software with a tape drive. I have been building computers and
> > setting up networks since the 80s. Top posting is confuing as hell. The
> > proper was to post is to cut the extranious stuff out of the message and
> > respond under what's left. http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
> > http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Greg wrote:
> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
>
> Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
>
> "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > >
> > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > >
> >
> > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> >
> > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > without interleaving responses.
> >
> > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > another damned furriner.
> >
> > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> >
> > But that's just me.
> >
And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
posters....
> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
>
> Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
>
> "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > >
> > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > >
> >
> > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> >
> > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > without interleaving responses.
> >
> > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > another damned furriner.
> >
> > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> >
> > But that's just me.
> >
And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
posters....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Greg wrote:
> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
>
> Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
>
> "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > >
> > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > >
> >
> > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> >
> > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > without interleaving responses.
> >
> > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > another damned furriner.
> >
> > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> >
> > But that's just me.
> >
And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
posters....
> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
>
> Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
>
> "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > >
> > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > >
> >
> > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> >
> > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > without interleaving responses.
> >
> > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > another damned furriner.
> >
> > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> >
> > But that's just me.
> >
And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
posters....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Greg wrote:
> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
>
> Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
>
> "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > >
> > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > >
> >
> > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> >
> > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > without interleaving responses.
> >
> > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > another damned furriner.
> >
> > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> >
> > But that's just me.
> >
And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
posters....
> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
>
> Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
>
> "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > >
> > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > >
> >
> > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> >
> > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > without interleaving responses.
> >
> > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > another damned furriner.
> >
> > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> >
> > But that's just me.
> >
And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
posters....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Greg wrote:
> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
>
> Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
>
> "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > >
> > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > >
> >
> > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> >
> > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > without interleaving responses.
> >
> > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > another damned furriner.
> >
> > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> >
> > But that's just me.
> >
And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
posters....
> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
>
> Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
>
> "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> >
> > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > >
> > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > >
> >
> > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> >
> > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > without interleaving responses.
> >
> > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > another damned furriner.
> >
> > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> >
> > But that's just me.
> >
And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
posters....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
Yup, just messes thing up don't it....
;-)
Mike
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Greg wrote:
>
> > Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> > From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> > Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> > Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
> >
> > Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> > bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> > when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> > point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
> >
> > "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> > >
> > > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > > >
> > > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> > >
> > > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > > without interleaving responses.
> > >
> > > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > > another damned furriner.
> > >
> > > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> > >
> > > But that's just me.
> > >
>
> And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
> posters....
;-)
Mike
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Greg wrote:
>
> > Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> > From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> > Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> > Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
> >
> > Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> > bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> > when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> > point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
> >
> > "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> > >
> > > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > > >
> > > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> > >
> > > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > > without interleaving responses.
> > >
> > > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > > another damned furriner.
> > >
> > > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> > >
> > > But that's just me.
> > >
>
> And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
> posters....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
Yup, just messes thing up don't it....
;-)
Mike
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Greg wrote:
>
> > Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> > From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> > Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> > Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
> >
> > Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> > bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> > when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> > point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
> >
> > "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> > >
> > > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > > >
> > > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> > >
> > > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > > without interleaving responses.
> > >
> > > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > > another damned furriner.
> > >
> > > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> > >
> > > But that's just me.
> > >
>
> And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
> posters....
;-)
Mike
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Greg wrote:
>
> > Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> > From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> > Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> > Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
> >
> > Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> > bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> > when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> > point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
> >
> > "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> > >
> > > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > > >
> > > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> > >
> > > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > > without interleaving responses.
> > >
> > > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > > another damned furriner.
> > >
> > > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> > >
> > > But that's just me.
> > >
>
> And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
> posters....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
Yup, just messes thing up don't it....
;-)
Mike
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Greg wrote:
>
> > Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> > From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> > Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> > Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
> >
> > Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> > bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> > when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> > point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
> >
> > "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> > >
> > > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > > >
> > > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> > >
> > > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > > without interleaving responses.
> > >
> > > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > > another damned furriner.
> > >
> > > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> > >
> > > But that's just me.
> > >
>
> And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
> posters....
;-)
Mike
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Greg wrote:
>
> > Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:04:34 GMT
> > From: Greg <greglc84@hotmail.com>
> > Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******
> > Subject: Re: question on jeep dealer refusing service.
> >
> > Myself I hate it when I'm following a thread and people post at the
> > bottom, so I have to scroll down to see what they have to say, and I hate it
> > when people cut out parts in their reply, if I come in on a thread at mid
> > point I like to be able to read what it's all about.
> >
> > "Lee Ayrton" <layrton@panix.com> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.NEB.4.58.0404191724330.797@panix1.panix. com...
> > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Sleestak wrote:
> > >
> > > > > By the way, top posting screws up the continuity of the conversation.
> > > >
> > > > Amen! Wish everyone felt this way.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's a subject that borders on a religion, with all that goes with it.
> > >
> > > I personally prefer posting styles that include bottom posting and
> > > trimming quoted material, with comments interleaved between points -- one
> > > advantage to that style is that the poster has to do some work so the
> > > reader doesn't have to, top-posting just means that nobody has to work,
> > > especially if your reader software dumps the cursor at the top of the
> > > page. But that's just me, and here the majority seem to like top-posting
> > > without interleaving responses.
> > >
> > > When I'm in Rome, I type with a Romish accent, unless I'm talking to
> > > another damned furriner.
> > >
> > > If the post I'm replying to is top-posted, I'll do the same. If I'm
> > > posting here and I've got a lot of comments that are best read with the
> > > material I'm responding to, I'll put a "Bottom posted with replies
> > > inserted into original text" note at the top, trim out the dead wood to
> > > make it easy on the reader and post away.
> > >
> > > But that's just me.
> > >
>
> And then there's those who don't follow the lead of the previous three
> posters....