RANT: Post replies at the top!
07-27-2004, 09:31 AM
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: RANT: Post replies at the top!
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:33:47 -0400, Lee Ayrton wrote:
>We do this here Well, I'm one who are solidly wedded to
>top-posting, no is solidly wedded posting, same Rockwell
>number. You mi to properly trimmed flexable and follow
>what the previ bottom posting, but likely to rant that
>_our_ way is t I can see some say that it makes it
>easier on all advantage to centre rant away, but don't expect
>to shift any posting. les are close enough to
>religious --
> GW De Lacey
(mono spaced font needed)
>We do this here Well, I'm one who are solidly wedded to
>top-posting, no is solidly wedded posting, same Rockwell
>number. You mi to properly trimmed flexable and follow
>what the previ bottom posting, but likely to rant that
>_our_ way is t I can see some say that it makes it
>easier on all advantage to centre rant away, but don't expect
>to shift any posting. les are close enough to
>religious --
> GW De Lacey
(mono spaced font needed)
07-27-2004, 03:14 PM
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Post replies at the top!
"SB" <chicbearsmook@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<li5Nc.1434$KLu1.411@news04.bloor.is.net.cabl e.rogers.com>...
> I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> bottom post.
> I told him he was a moron!!
>
> But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier as
> you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're just
> replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit, do
> some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that you
> had no real opinion!!
>
> Man, ranting is contagious!!
> "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take an
> > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the top.
> > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's not
> > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> >
> > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We don't
> > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either. People
> > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you have
> to
> > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> Yeesh.
> > /rant
> >
> >
Exactly.
> I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> bottom post.
> I told him he was a moron!!
>
> But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier as
> you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're just
> replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit, do
> some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that you
> had no real opinion!!
>
> Man, ranting is contagious!!
> "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take an
> > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the top.
> > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's not
> > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> >
> > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We don't
> > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either. People
> > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you have
> to
> > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> Yeesh.
> > /rant
> >
> >
Exactly.
07-27-2004, 03:14 PM
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Post replies at the top!
"SB" <chicbearsmook@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<li5Nc.1434$KLu1.411@news04.bloor.is.net.cabl e.rogers.com>...
> I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> bottom post.
> I told him he was a moron!!
>
> But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier as
> you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're just
> replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit, do
> some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that you
> had no real opinion!!
>
> Man, ranting is contagious!!
> "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take an
> > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the top.
> > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's not
> > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> >
> > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We don't
> > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either. People
> > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you have
> to
> > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> Yeesh.
> > /rant
> >
> >
Exactly.
> I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> bottom post.
> I told him he was a moron!!
>
> But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier as
> you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're just
> replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit, do
> some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that you
> had no real opinion!!
>
> Man, ranting is contagious!!
> "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take an
> > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the top.
> > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's not
> > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> >
> > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We don't
> > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either. People
> > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you have
> to
> > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> Yeesh.
> > /rant
> >
> >
Exactly.
07-27-2004, 03:14 PM
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Post replies at the top!
"SB" <chicbearsmook@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<li5Nc.1434$KLu1.411@news04.bloor.is.net.cabl e.rogers.com>...
> I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> bottom post.
> I told him he was a moron!!
>
> But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier as
> you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're just
> replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit, do
> some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that you
> had no real opinion!!
>
> Man, ranting is contagious!!
> "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take an
> > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the top.
> > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's not
> > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> >
> > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We don't
> > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either. People
> > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you have
> to
> > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> Yeesh.
> > /rant
> >
> >
Exactly.
> I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> bottom post.
> I told him he was a moron!!
>
> But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier as
> you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're just
> replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit, do
> some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that you
> had no real opinion!!
>
> Man, ranting is contagious!!
> "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take an
> > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the top.
> > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's not
> > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> >
> > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We don't
> > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either. People
> > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you have
> to
> > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> Yeesh.
> > /rant
> >
> >
Exactly.
07-27-2004, 03:14 PM
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Post replies at the top!
"SB" <chicbearsmook@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<li5Nc.1434$KLu1.411@news04.bloor.is.net.cabl e.rogers.com>...
> I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> bottom post.
> I told him he was a moron!!
>
> But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier as
> you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're just
> replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit, do
> some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that you
> had no real opinion!!
>
> Man, ranting is contagious!!
> "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take an
> > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the top.
> > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's not
> > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> >
> > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We don't
> > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either. People
> > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you have
> to
> > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> Yeesh.
> > /rant
> >
> >
Exactly.
> I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> bottom post.
> I told him he was a moron!!
>
> But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier as
> you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're just
> replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit, do
> some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that you
> had no real opinion!!
>
> Man, ranting is contagious!!
> "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take an
> > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the top.
> > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's not
> > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> >
> > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We don't
> > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either. People
> > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you have
> to
> > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> Yeesh.
> > /rant
> >
> >
Exactly.
07-27-2004, 05:03 PM
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Post replies at the top!
"dsm" <dsm_2004@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:2b81fac0.0407271114.52f2cd66@posting.google.c om...
> "SB" <chicbearsmook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<li5Nc.1434$KLu1.411@news04.bloor.is.net.cabl e.rogers.com>...
> > I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> > bottom post.
> > I told him he was a moron!!
> >
> > But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier
as
> > you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're
just
> > replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit,
do
> > some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that
you
> > had no real opinion!!
> >
> > Man, ranting is contagious!!
> > "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> > news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take
an
> > > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the
top.
> > > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's
not
> > > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> > >
> > > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We
don't
> > > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either.
People
> > > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you
have
> > to
> > > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> > Yeesh.
> > > /rant
> > >
> > >
>
> Exactly.
Well, in most cases that's probably correct, but there are exceptions.
:)~
07-27-2004, 05:03 PM
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Post replies at the top!
"dsm" <dsm_2004@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:2b81fac0.0407271114.52f2cd66@posting.google.c om...
> "SB" <chicbearsmook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<li5Nc.1434$KLu1.411@news04.bloor.is.net.cabl e.rogers.com>...
> > I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> > bottom post.
> > I told him he was a moron!!
> >
> > But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier
as
> > you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're
just
> > replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit,
do
> > some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that
you
> > had no real opinion!!
> >
> > Man, ranting is contagious!!
> > "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> > news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take
an
> > > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the
top.
> > > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's
not
> > > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> > >
> > > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We
don't
> > > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either.
People
> > > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you
have
> > to
> > > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> > Yeesh.
> > > /rant
> > >
> > >
>
> Exactly.
Well, in most cases that's probably correct, but there are exceptions.
:)~
07-27-2004, 05:03 PM
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Post replies at the top!
"dsm" <dsm_2004@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:2b81fac0.0407271114.52f2cd66@posting.google.c om...
> "SB" <chicbearsmook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<li5Nc.1434$KLu1.411@news04.bloor.is.net.cabl e.rogers.com>...
> > I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> > bottom post.
> > I told him he was a moron!!
> >
> > But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier
as
> > you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're
just
> > replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit,
do
> > some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that
you
> > had no real opinion!!
> >
> > Man, ranting is contagious!!
> > "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> > news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take
an
> > > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the
top.
> > > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's
not
> > > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> > >
> > > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We
don't
> > > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either.
People
> > > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you
have
> > to
> > > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> > Yeesh.
> > > /rant
> > >
> > >
>
> Exactly.
Well, in most cases that's probably correct, but there are exceptions.
:)~
07-27-2004, 05:03 PM
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Post replies at the top!
"dsm" <dsm_2004@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:2b81fac0.0407271114.52f2cd66@posting.google.c om...
> "SB" <chicbearsmook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<li5Nc.1434$KLu1.411@news04.bloor.is.net.cabl e.rogers.com>...
> > I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
> > bottom post.
> > I told him he was a moron!!
> >
> > But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier
as
> > you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're
just
> > replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit,
do
> > some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that
you
> > had no real opinion!!
> >
> > Man, ranting is contagious!!
> > "Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
> > news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> > > Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
> > > replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take
an
> > > example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the
top.
> > > Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's
not
> > > like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
> > >
> > > Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We
don't
> > > need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either.
People
> > > with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
> > > another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you
have
> > to
> > > scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
> > Yeesh.
> > > /rant
> > >
> > >
>
> Exactly.
Well, in most cases that's probably correct, but there are exceptions.
:)~
07-27-2004, 05:57 PM
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Post replies at the top!
Jeff Lowe wrote:
> "dsm" <dsm_2004@operamail.com> wrote in message
> news:2b81fac0.0407271114.52f2cd66@posting.google.c om...
>
>>"SB" <chicbearsmook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:<li5Nc.1434$KLu1.411@news04.bloor.is.net.cabl e.rogers.com>...
>
>>>I had a guy in another newsgroup tell me that it was proper etiquette to
>>>bottom post.
>>>I told him he was a moron!!
>>>
>>>But ya, I don't care TOO TOO much where you post. Top posting is easier
>
> as
>
>>>you don't have to snip too much....but you bottom posters....if you're
>
> just
>
>>>replying and saying, "YES" or some other one word reply...then dammit,
>
> do
>
>>>some post editing so we don't have to scroll so much to find out that
>
> you
>
>>>had no real opinion!!
>>>
>>>Man, ranting is contagious!!
>>>"Endo" <me@oh.my> wrote in message
>>>news:7u2dnTk2UdWZUJncRVn-rw@comcast.com...
>>>
>>>>Who wants to scroll through the same message 10 times to read all the
>>>>replies because you posted at the bottom of the original text? Take
>
> an
>
>>>>example from Bill ------ and Jerry Bransford...post your reply at the
>
> top.
>
>>>>Most newsreaders nest the replies under the original anyway, so it's
>
> not
>
>>>>like you need a refresher of the topic before reading every reply.
>>>>
>>>>Oh, and while i'm at it...trim the excess off the quoted text. We
>
> don't
>
>>>>need 3 pages of crap tacked on the end of the old message either.
>
> People
>
>>>>with grandiose signatures are the main offenders. Every reply adding
>>>>another page of nothing but signature, and that of course means you
>
> have
>
>>> to
>>>
>>>>scroll through 4 pages now just to read a one line reply to a post.
>>>
>>> Yeesh.
>>>
>>>>/rant
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>Exactly.
>
> Well, in most cases that's probably correct, but there are exceptions.
> :)~
>
>
Precisely.
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon - Rubicon Express 4.5"
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
Pronunciation: 'jEp
Function: noun
Date: 1940
Etymology: from g. p. (G= 'Government' P= '80 inch wheelbase')
A small general-purpose motor vehicle with 80-inch wheelbase,
1/4-ton capacity, and four-wheel drive used by the U.S. army in
World War II.
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________