linuxgeek: Re: [LINUX_Newbies] TOP vs BOTTOM POSTING

They also make the discussion easier to follow and reply to and when
properly done, do not require a lot of scrolling to get the response.
Also, inline tends to help break up a post that has multiple topics,
much the same way you'd break up a text book into multiple chapters to
cover various topics and/or subtopics.

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 08:56, Roy <linuxcanuck@gmail.com> wrote:
> Netiquette of course is great, but it assumes an even playing field. It
> assumes that everyone is accessing the same material the same way which is
> no longer true. These rules were written when computer bulletin boards were
> the rage, before the www. Everything was text based, everyone used a desktop
> computer and there was no email.

Actually, they evolved more on UseNET, which really is not dissimilar
to Yahoo!Groups. The biggest difference is that YahooGroups allow for
things like HTML and Rich Text formatting while UseNet, to this day,
is still text only. And the rules evolved in a time when not everyone
had, or could afford, a desktop computer. Lots of people, myself
included, did indeed access usenet via dialup connection on a desktop,
but even more, myself also included, accessed the various groups via
ttys attached to some sort of mainframe or mini-computer.

However, the same can be said of the accepted and required formatting
for an envelope. For example, this howto:
http://www.wikihow.com/Write-an-Address-on-an-Envelope

Yet I don't see anyone who gripes about the request to format an
e-mail in a particular way also fighting the good fight against the
USPS or other global postal services for requiring them to address an
envelope a certain way.

Same can be said of business correspondence. If you don't send, in a
business setting, a letter formatted in an acceptable manner, usually
with sender's name and address in the top left, recipients name and
address just below that (optional), date in the upper right, greeting
just below addresses, body, closing, space allowed for manual
signature followed by typed name of the sender followed by list of
attachments or pages, and optionally the mark of the person who
actually did the typing, you will most likely not be taken that
seriously.

Also look at another written document: written statutes. In most
cases, you'll find that almost all written statutes follow a given
format. You'll also find that books are required to follow a written
format for presenting information:

The point is, the age of something doesn't necessarily invalidate it.
Back to envelopes, try addressing an envelope by putting the
recipients name vertically on the left side, the senders address in
the top right corner and the stamp on the back somewhere along the
flap seal. There's a VERY good chance that the Post Office will send
that right back to you, or it will just become "lost in the mail" and
forgotten because you didn't take the time to properly format your
envelop in a manner required by the USPS in order to more efficiently
process incoming and outgoing pieces of mail.

> Now some people use netbooks with small screens and some people even use
> cell phones. It also assumes that users are accessing the material through
> the forum, but many people use email which is quite different depending on
> the programme or the email site. I may be using Gmail while someone else
> will use Yahoo, and another using Evolution, Kmail or Thunderbird. Each one
> offers a different experience.

Sure they do, and the power of choice is a good thing. I use a
netbook quite a bit, and I can still read and format a proper e-mail
or post using it's small 10.1" screen. I WILL say, as I mentioned in
response to a different post, that the same can not be said for
sending via a mobile device like a blackberry or Justin's cell phone.
The UI in mobile devices are not really designed for the uses they
get, and as such are generally the exception to the good formatting
rules.

The same can be said for various web e-mail setups, however, those do
allow for more proper formatting. I, myself, use GMail to aggregate
about 6 different e-mail addresses so I can check them all in one
location. But I also, from time to time, use Thunderbird. Evolution
I gave up on ages ago because it was just as clunky as Outlook. It's
probably far better these days than it was then, but I've just not
bothered to give it a go because what I have works for now. If I
discover something in the future that works better, I'll switch.

> In forums I prefer inline posting so that you can respond specifically. This
> is impractical in Gmail as the formatting goes crazy and people get all
> kinds of mess on the other end. This happens because you are breaking the
> html structure. The forums are mostly text based.

Not true. While GMail DOES default to Rich Text, there is an option
to convert every reply to plain text. In the past, this was a default
action, and when chosen would stay that way. They recently changed
that behaviour though, and now you have to chose it for every e-mail
sent. I do every time, which is why my replies are generally very
consistently formatted, properly trimmed and replied in-line unless
the quoted material necessary for a good response is too long to leave
inline.

YahooGroups, for what it's worth, is a bit of a PITA for not keeping
the option of receiving group posts in plain text. This was
previously an option for members of a given group, but it was removed.

> I prefer top posting to bottom posting because discussions can get quite
> long and it is a pain to scroll to the bottom every time, especially on a
> netbook. I can't even begin to imagine doing it on a cell phone. It is nice
> to see the most recent discussion first because many people follow from the
> start and I see no need to rehash it every single time.

I do it all the time. The trick, however, is that we aren't talking
about JUST top and/or bottom and/or inline posting. The sender should
ALSO be trimming the quoted material to just what's relevant to the
discussion and reply. Quoting 6 posts worth of text is also bad
formatting practice. Trimming that down to only what's necessary is
good formatting practice, just as inline or bottom posting is the
usual accepted formatting practice.

> If people do not want to read what you write simply because you do not
> follow their rigid views then they can't be much interested in getting help,
> helping others or joining discussions. That is unfortunate, but their views
> are probably equally rigid on other things and discussing things with them
> may be akin to banging your head on a wall since there is no give and take.

Not at all, though you are correct about the head/wall banging
activities. I'm honestly only diving in to these discussions because
I needed some entertainment, and a good terse discussion over a
severly beaten equine corpse is always good for laughs. But the
points being made by myself and others are very valid. IN GENERAL,
the people with the most ability to answer the questions that come to
a list like this do not have the time to decipher 15 arbitrary email
formats. There are two acceptable formats, and those of us who can
and do freely give our time to answer questions expect those formats
because they are easier to read and follow, especially when you have
limited time to do so.

Now, for an example of what I mean, for the rest of my comments in
this section, you'll have to go back to the top of the e-mail where I
top posted out of context. I bet what I typed at the very beginning
of this reply didn't quite make much sense, but were it posted inline
here, it would make a LOT of sense, as it's in context in this post
that covers several sub-topics.

> This discussion is repetitive and cyclical. People who follow the rules are
> assuming (incorrectly) that the rules are rational and sensible so get their
> nose out of joint. After all what's the point of having a rule if it isn't
> being obeyed? If the rule isn't being obeyed then we need to find out why
> and revisit the rules. Usually there is a sensible explanation.

See my comments above regarding the accepted rules for addressing an
envelope and business letter.

> The point is that Yahoo encourages people to get the information outside of
> the forum by email in not one but two formats (digest and individual). Once
> you leave the forum the situation changes and so should the rules. We still
> need to be considerate and all of that, but the posting rules should be
> tailored to the method by which you access the information. We need to be
> practical.

Roy, I have greatly enjoyed your posts thus far. I really have, and
while I disagree with a lot of your comments in this one, I do have to
say that I 100% agree with you here. This is indeed the biggest
problem, not just here, but on a LOT of other lists similar to this
one. Back when the ONLY thing you could get was text based,
maintaining a level of standards was easy. Not so much these days
when people can [bold][font][randomHTML]send anything
[iso-18293-l2n]they please in various formats (and the fake tags are
what those of us who don't like HTML formatted email) generally see.

Like I said, there was a time when users could pick plain text as the
default format for all e-mail sent to them from a particular group,
and I believe it was also possible to force an entire group to use
plain text only by disallowing HTML. A lot of non-Yahoo listservs to
this day still reject HTML formatted mail and the reason is exactly
what you mentioned at the very beginning of your reply. There are so
many different ways to read e-mail, and NONE of them adhere to a
particular standard. IN fact, even the ones that are specifically
geared toward HTML don't always render HTML mail the same way as
others do due to someone in the chain not even adhering to HTML
standards.

Lunch time!

Jeff

--

Mike Ditka - "If God had wanted man to play soccer, he wouldn't have
given us arms."