From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 3 23:28:00 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E4A8106564A for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 23:28:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jon@radel.com) Received: from wave.radel.com (wave.radel.com [216.143.151.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F1A98FC13 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 23:27:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wave.radel.com (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.1.6) with PIPE id 10289912; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 18:27:59 -0400 Received: from [192.168.43.232] (account jon@radel.com HELO gravenstein.local) by wave.radel.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.6) with ESMTP-TLS id 10289910 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 18:27:50 -0400 Message-ID: <4E39CB66.8020903@radel.com> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 18:27:50 -0400 From: Jon Radel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <201108031901.p73J1ofu046001@mail.r-bonomi.com> In-Reply-To: <201108031901.p73J1ofu046001@mail.r-bonomi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Radel.com-MailScanner-Information: Please contact Jon for more information X-Radel.com-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro CLI mailer Subject: Re: top-posting 'condescending asshats' (to use Ryan Coleman's description of himself) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 23:28:00 -0000 On 8/3/11 3:01 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote: > *ANY* situation where the elapsed time between messages is longer than the > recipient's ability to retain the 'frame of reference' (i.e., the previous > message) in memory, it _is_ harder for the recipient of the message to follow > top-posted content than interleaved/bottom-posted. They _do_ have to scan > back-and-forth to find out (first) _what_ is being talked about,and (then) > what the response is. But you can learn so very many interesting things if you read down to the part that has the internal discussion about what they wish to tell you, which they completely loose track of by they time they send you a nice sanitized statement way up top..... ;-) --Jon Radel jon@radel.com