[Dshield] Phishing solution

Tony Earnshaw tonye at billy.demon.nl
Thu Jun 23 06:07:38 GMT 2005

ons, 22.06.2005 kl. 23.49 skrev Laura Vance:

> >Far worse are all the bloody top-posters, no names, no pack drill as my
> >sergeant once said. Mostly I can't be bothered to read their posts - but
> >in your case I made an exception ;)

> Since you have an aversion to top-posting, I'll post on the bottom so 
> you'll be sure to read it. ;)  Neither form of posting bothers me, 
> because if I want to read a message I do, but I've never been clear on 
> why some people are so adamant about starting above or below the message.

It isn't so much the fact that you start above the quoted text, it's the
work you put the person to to have to answer individual points in your
message - such as this one. I normally just can't be bothered.

> I prefer top-posting and reading messages that were top-posted.  This is 
> so that I don't have to scroll down to find the content of the email 
> that I'm trying to read.  Most of the reasons I've heard in the case for 
> bottom posting is that it's more natural to read from the top to the 
> bottom.  However, if you're reading a thread as it comes along, you will 
> only need to refer to the older messages if you forget a reference or if 
> you need to refresh your memory on what someone said.

Sometimes - no often - posters break threads, or their MUA does - so
that there's no continuity. It's useful to see the context, in that

>   In this case, the 
> old messages are more of a foot-note or a reference item.  The only 
> thing that top-posting doesn't help is if someone ignores a thread until 
> there have already been several posts to that thread... in which case 
> (if people are following netiquette) most of the old, irrelevant to the 
> current post, text has been removed anyway.
> In all my years on USENET, mailing lists, and other community electronic 
> communications, I've found that all that bottom posting does is makes 
> people scroll to the bottom before they can start reading.  So... the 
> question becomes, why is bottom posting a good thing?

It's not bottom posting that's a good thing - that's just as bad as top
posting, just as is quoting reams and reams of old references without
editing out the irrelevant bits. Like what follows :)




mail: tonye at billy.demon.nl

More information about the list mailing list