Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 11:12:19 +0800 From: Kevin Stevens <kevin_stevens@pursued-with.net> To: Tillman Hodgson <tillman@seekingfire.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Top posting Message-ID: <65DAAAA7-7A1C-11D8-9DA7-000A959CEE6A@pursued-with.net> In-Reply-To: <20040319232459.GF3884@seekingfire.com> References: <20040319172130.GB2044@cs025_2k> <20040319174618.GH64130@keyslapper.org> <200403191428.24150.cmcmanis@mcmanis.com> <20040319223506.GA63254@bhunter.net> <20040319232459.GF3884@seekingfire.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 20, 2004, at 07:24, Tillman Hodgson wrote: > On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 05:35:06PM -0500, Al Johnson wrote: >> I'm with you... Top-posting makes the most sense for me. >>> It comes down to opinion I think > > My standard response to top-posting: > > A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. > Q: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? > A: Top-posting. > Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? > > Top-posting may be an opinion, but RFC 1855 makes it _standard_ > opinion. > > Best regards, > > -T Second sentence of RFC1855 - "This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any kind." So much for that. People who abhor top posting feel very strongly about it. People who don't, usually don't. This falls firmly into my general life philosophy: I generally agree with the opinions of people minding their own business. I generally disagree with the opinions of people minding my business. My strongest opinion on top-posting is that I don't want to see endless threads about it in the lists I'm reading - like this one. KeS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?65DAAAA7-7A1C-11D8-9DA7-000A959CEE6A>