on a different "manners" topic, was Re: Phishing...
Ed.Lewis at neustar.biz
Wed Jan 3 14:33:20 UTC 2007
I'm not going to pick on the "it's" (grammatically correct, but it
refers the email disclaimers which I don't feel like commenting on)
but I want to say that I've come to appreciate top-posting. With
top-posts, there is no need to scroll down the list, and it is more
like a conversation than injecting comments in-line.
Some say that top-posting reverses the conversation, but if you are
thumbing through the archives of top-posted threads, each
contribution is on the first screen and you can navigate message to
message in time-order. In my personal opinion, reading through
archives of in-lined threads is much more of a problem - for one
because threads take off in other directions and an in-line
conversation never stands alone. Usually with a few nested in-lines
I loose "who said what" context too.
(As an exercise, try to prepare a reply in-line and then as a
top-post. You will see that in-line means less typing, as you don't
have to "rephrase the question." In-line is less work to render, but
I think it is a poor communication style.)
As far as the HTML, I don't think I use it, but I fail to see why
it's rude. Sorry, it is newer technology and it does screw up old
tools. (I do get bit by it - the hotels seem to love HTML
confirmations that I can't read on my work mailer.) It's my/reader's
choice to not use newer tools.
I do agree that full quoting is a pain - especially when the message
is less than 1% new content. Especially when all them new headers
(DKIM keys and what not) fill up my screen first anyway. Yeah, I
There. I've said it...oh, and the disclaimers don't give me
heartburn. I just ignore them.
At 8:03 -0500 1/3/07, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
>Because it's very rude -- like top-posting, or full-quoting, or sending
>email marked up with HTML. Because it's an unprovoked threat. Because
Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468
Dessert - aka Service Pack 1 for lunch.
More information about the NANOG