Top post vs. bottom post (was: Re: [CFT] libtool on nix->cygwin cross, with wine)

Top post vs. bottom post (was: Re: [CFT] libtool on nix->cygwin cross, with wine)

[Danilo Turina]

Ben Kamen wrote:
> 
> 
> Greg Freemyer wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:35 PM, rhubbell <Rhubbell@ihubbell.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:15:33 -0500
>>> Greg Chicares wrote:
>>>> By the way, this list discourages full quoting:
>>>>   http://www.cygwin.com/acronyms/#TOFU
>>> Ok, this is one neurotic list.
>>
>> A lot of Linux mailing lists have that policy.  Especially if it is
>> high volume or has a large subscriber base.  The idea is that someone
>> can read a single email and understand it without having to bounce all
>> over the place.
> 
> What still always makes me laugh is the people who are so emphatic about 
> top vs. bottom posting.
> 
> (someone even had a clever .sig showing the flow of top posting and how 
> "backwards" it is)
> 
> But honestly, we humans have remarkable brains that let us put back 
> together the conversation in either order.
> Is it really *that* hard? Maybe for some.

I just think as you do. For me top posting has ever been THE way to 
reply to e-mails. I always used it at work and at home (unless it was 
more useful to do an inline reply).

I just find it more natural than bottom posting, for the reason that if 
I'm following a thread post by post, I don't want to re-read every time 
all the things that have been said, instead I only care about the last 
thing said.

Imho, it's just a matter of personal preference AND of the tools that 
one uses (people often forget that if you use a hammer you'll tend to 
thing everything as a nail (even if it's not)).

I don't like zealotry and I recognize the importance of being pragmatic 
(even if I'm not always able to be pragmatic and sometimes I'm a zealot).

I top posted in one of the Cygwin lists, I have been said that it was 
wrong there, I explained my reasons and told that I didn't want to 
scroll till the end of the e-mail each time and was answered that other 
e-mail clients allowed that easily. I searched and installed an addon 
for Thunderbird (QuoteCollapse) that helped me in surviving here. Full stop.


To summarize: I don't like bottom posting, I prefer top posting. But I'm 
not here to change the world, just to follow a bunch of lists that talks 
about a product that I use. I'm a human: I adapt myself to new 
situations and I understand that other people think in a different way 
than me.

Last point: I'm not interested in convincing anybody that my thinking is 
better than his/her. I'm not interested in helping anyone understand 
that two different thinkings/point of views can cohexist without harm.

Ciao,
	Danilo

-- 
Danilo Turina
Alcatel-Lucent
Software Developer
OND Network Management
Rieti (Italy)
Phone: +39 0746 600332

7 anni 10 mesi 15 giorni 23 ore 33 minuti 30 secondi

Re: Top post vs. bottom post (was: Re: [CFT] libtool on nix->cygwin cross, with wine)

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Feb 25 09:24, Danilo Turina wrote:
> Ben Kamen wrote:
>> Greg Freemyer wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:35 PM, rhubbell <Rhubbell@ihubbell.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:15:33 -0500
>>>> Greg Chicares wrote:
>>>>> By the way, this list discourages full quoting:
>>>>>   http://www.cygwin.com/acronyms/#TOFU
>>>> Ok, this is one neurotic list.
>>>[...]
> I just find it more natural than bottom posting, for the reason that if  
> I'm following a thread post by post, I don't want to re-read every time  
> all the things that have been said, instead I only care about the last  
> thing said.

Which is exactly the reason why full quoting is not the way to go, either.
That's what bugs me all the time.  Why are people not willing or capable
of removing all the stuff from a text which doesn't add anything to the
discussion anymore?

And that's worse with top posting.  I'm often getting exactly this TOFU
style messages because they are used in the sales world.  What you call
the "last thing said" is something along the lines of

  Corinna,

  can you help this guy?

And that's it.  NO information at all.  To find out what's going on I
have to scroll through lots of text until I finally find the original
request of "this guy".  And that request it not necessarily the first or
last reply of "this guy" within that worm-style mail in which nobody
ever removed any non-important information.  What is the advantage of
that mailing style, please?  I don't see it.  It just hurts.

> I top posted in one of the Cygwin lists, I have been said that it was  
> wrong there, I explained my reasons and told that I didn't want to  
> scroll till the end of the e-mail each time [...]

Again, that's the other bad style.  Full quoting just hurts as well,
same as top posting.  Sometimes it is not easy to filter out the
important part of a previous posting but that's no reason at least
to *try*.


Corinna

RE: Top post vs. bottom post (was: Re: [CFT] libtool on nix->cygwin cross, with wine)

[Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E]]

Corinna Vinschen wrote on Wednesday, February 25, 2009 3:56 AM:
> Which is exactly the reason why full quoting is not the way to go,
> either. 
> That's what bugs me all the time.  Why are people not willing or
> capable of removing all the stuff from a text which doesn't add
> anything to the discussion anymore?  

And the VERY worst is leaving in the footer (Unsubscribe, etc.).
The new post will just get another one.