JP wrote:
"Ed Pirrero" wrote in message
ups.com...



Really? I found several references that discourage it. And nothing
but that wiki article on pointing out errors.

Right. There are also no rules against belching in public or chewing
with your mouth open.

People are polite out of consideration for others, not because of some
law or other.



The references (I found them too) were opinion, presented by various
commenters.
Nothing hard and fast, except that there are no rules



If you read from top to bottom, that's the only reason to post in a
fashion that reads like a conversation.

I agree that top-posting is common. All sorts of rude behavior is
common (cell phone conversations in public, fer instance), but that
doesn't make it less rude.

Proper trimming avoids having to wade through all sorts of previous
crap.


Only in a case like this where we are going point to point.
If only one point is being addressed, which is more common on USENET
top posting makes the most sense, it saves one having to scan through
previously
read material looking for one or two lines.


Not only that, but leaving the rest untrimmed *really* violates
netiquette. Full-quoting is another term to look up.

Nice non sequitur. Full-quoting is boorish, and top-posters full-quote
more often than not.

I don't need controlling personalities to direct my research.
You are free to look up what you wish of course.


Unfortunately, full-quoting AND top-posting often go hand-in-hand.
Trim what you're not replying to, post underneath, in logical reading
order, and give credibility to your flames of MJV by not name-calling.
Everyone gets what they want, right?

Yeah, logic. When books are read back-to-front, top-posting becomes
logical.


Your opinion on top-posting differs from mine and I'm sure the difference
will continue.
My practice reflects my logical POV, and how I absorb information.
Since there are no rules anyhow this discussion is merely about preference.

I don't post replies to Vandeman. He's an idiot, and doesn't deserve
the attention.

I hope you found this to be more readable, after all, interspersed
postings make more sense if you post in the logical place, which is
above the quoted text, right? Oh, wait...

And in clarification, I did not flame MV.
I responded to him in the language of his own kind, as a courtesy,
in order that he could more readily understand the post.
Interestingly you did not take your criticism of poor netiquette to him.
Maybe that means you approve of his method of posting?


E.P.

A: Top-posters

Q: What's the nmost annoying thing in usenet?