On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Barclay, Daniel <dan...@fgm.com> wrote:
> Christofer C. Bell wrote: > > Mail 1: Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? > > Mail 2: A: Top-posting. > > Mail 3: Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? > > Mail 4: A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read > > text. > > Wrong. Since when does even a threaded mail reader rearrange the content > within a single message into a different order? > It doesn't, and you're splitting hairs. In a threaded mail reader, I've just read the previous post, there is zero need to provide context. This is what it looks like in a threaded mail reader when you're bottom posting: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? > What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? Top-posting. >> What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? > Top-posting. Why is top-posting such a bad thing? >>> What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? >> Top-posting. > Why is top-posting such a bad thing? Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. This sort of display is annoying. You've already seen what it looks like when top-posted in a modern mail reader (ie; it follows the order in which people normally read text). > Chris's example showed the order of replies in a message constructed with > top-posting. Are you trying to win your argument by trying to pull a > fast one (by switching to talking about the order in the message-list > pane instead of the message), or do you just not understand Chris's > example? > The most common arguments for bottom-posting are based on the mail reader people are using, "but without context in my non-threaded, written in 1980 mail reader, I can't tell what the post is about." So obviously, what people are using to read their mail is germane to the discussion. In a modern mail reader, top-posted messages are what flow more naturally. A more successful argument for your position would be to point to mail archives where an entire discussion needs to be preserved in a logical order contained in a single post. Continuing to point to an active discussion thread as proof that top posting is illogical... is illogical. You are doing nothing more than pandering the to the pedantic. I understand the other Chris' example just fine. Do you understand mine? -- Chris
