Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 04:49:47 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top posting (off-topic) Message-ID: <20071126024947.GC5574@kobe.laptop> In-Reply-To: <20071126020110.GG29622@demeter.hydra> References: <31AE442CCBC1094ABC40CE85B0149F06468CE8@MAIL1.registry.otago.ac.nz> <47470077.7030706@chrononomicon.com> <20071123184838.GA18711@parts-unknown.org> <20071126015615.GE29622@demeter.hydra> <20071126020110.GG29622@demeter.hydra>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2007-11-25 19:01, Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 06:56:15PM -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > > > > I think it's kind of a chicken-and-egg problem: we don't really know for > > sure whether TOFU[1] posting spurred much of the rise of illiteracy or > > the increase of relative illiteracy on the Internet led to an increase in > > TOFU posting. Which came first? > > I forgot to include the footnote about TOFU in the preceding message. It > would have looked something like this: > > [1]: TOFU = Text Over, Fullquote Under; the most common format of top > posted replies The footnote was easy to understand after a quick Wikipedia search: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting#Top-posting Quoting the text (so list members don't have to actually repeat the search): Some maintain that top-posting is _never_ appropriate, and refer to it jokingly as the "TOFU" method (from the German "text oben, fullquote unten", sometimes translated "text over, fullquote under") [...] Nice one. I had not heard of "TOFU posting" before :)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071126024947.GC5574>