 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Country Specific / Australian Mac Group / February 2005Top Posting
After being chastised by Nikki re "top posting" (when I had never heard of the term) and my dribbling apology, I have now widely explored the issue. It is clear (to me, that is) that top posting was against netiquette years ago, and still is with many users. Fair enough. However after exploring many newsgroups, and asking opinions, the response is 50:50, as it was on this NG. I have now looked at the feedback, and I have decided to top post. If you can't live with this pls put me in your "kill" list. But please all be accepting of other peoples' right of choice. Regards <snip> > you can't live with this pls put me in your "kill" list. Done ! :)  SignatureTrevor S "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." -Albert Einstein Fair enough, your choice Regards > <snip> > >> you can't live with this pls put me in your "kill" list. > > Done ! :) In this age of threaded news reading, why is the original post required in the reply at all....? I don't want to upset anyone but I decided (and I may be wrong) that top posting versus bottom, posting was simply a non event. I couldn't give a sh.t if someone kill files me. Time to grow up. I offer no apology to anyone, any more. For those that are pedantic, as I said. kill file me. No thing lost, but I hope you won't > In this age of threaded news reading, why is the original post required in > the reply at all....? > In this age of threaded news reading, why is the original post required > in the reply at all....? So that if some point in the future, only a single post is accessible, you can still gather most of the conversation. David Angelovich <fake@fake.com> wrote in news:L8YQd.164221$K7.123064@news- server.bigpond.net.au: > In this age of threaded news reading, why is the original post required > in the reply at all....? Retention rates on some newswevers are poor e.g one I use only has 3 days. The post you are replying may not be there so it makes sense to have the relveant piece attached to make some sense of the context. As to the OPs assertions, I went through the same things a decade ago and decided to stick with the the RFC and traditional ettiquete as I typically only change from what has been established if there is a benefit. Tha being said, I support his right to post however he wants, the same as anyone else can kill file him if they want for his "rudeness" in ignoring the RFC's and tradition. That's why I like usenet as opposed to moderated WWW forums ... blah .... SignatureTrevor S "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." -Albert Einstein > David Angelovich <fake@fake.com> wrote in news:L8YQd.164221$K7.123064@news- > server.bigpond.net.au: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Retention rates on some newswevers are poor e.g one I use only has 3 days. I suppose that's one advantage of using an off-line newsreader like MacSoup. You can set the number of days until old posts are deleted from your hard drive. I keep posts from aus.computers.mac for 50 days. Good if you want to find that hardware item that was advertised a month ago. Peter SignaturePeter McCallum Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA > I suppose that's one advantage of using an off-line newsreader like > MacSoup. You can set the number of days until old posts are deleted from > your hard drive. I keep posts from aus.computers.mac for 50 days. Good > if you want to find that hardware item that was advertised a month ago. What's really funny about all this is that if everyone used MacSoup, you could follow the thread so neatly that the new comments would be basically what matters in any given posting, and if it were just one point of discussion, then top posting would probably be slightly more efficient! I say that as a person who will never top post because I have been doing it the right (heh heh) way for 15 years or more. But top posting really falls apart when the posting is large and you need to respond to bits of it. Then it simply doesn't work. Fact is, if you're on a Mac and you don't want binaries and you like the offline option, MacSoup should be every Mac user's newsreader of choice. It is regrettable that people don't know how to edit posts properly, because that would solve every problem and save all this angst. There! I've had my whinge. TOB can post however he likes - up to him.... Rifty SignatureAcademic and Computing Help http://rifty.net The same applies if you (like me) use Netscape for your newsreader - when following a thread, or responding to the subject heading, instead of scrolling through piles of stuff you have already read, the latest post is right there at the top for you to read - that is why I consider it courteous to top post. Although when replying to a list of questions etc then only the intro is top posted and my other comments are interspersed with the OPs text David > What's really funny about all this is that if everyone used MacSoup, you > could follow the thread so neatly that the new comments would be [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I Dale of the information without having to scroll down very far, or at all. the information that is relevant to the reply. That way you get enough That's why you posts should be edited down to ensure they only have > The same applies if you (like me) use Netscape for your newsreader - when > following a thread, or responding to the subject heading, instead of [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > point of discussion, then top posting would probably be slightly more > > efficient! Signaturedstanbro@spam.o.matic.bigpond.net.au A: Top posting. Q: What's the most annoying thing about usenet? Just because half the people posting these days are ignorant, it doesn't mean you have to be too. Cheers, Robert. I don't consider myself ignorant. If you do, I don't care. Maybe non conformist. Like half of this NG. Robert, pls don't be consumed by non conformism. What I am saying already rules in newsgroups. If it is really important to you simply kill my postings. Don't debate it. I don't give a sh.t who kills me> s > A: Top posting. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Cheers, Robert. > I don't give a sh.t who kills me> > Ok. Just a sec while I grab the AK47... Signaturergds, Pete ----- http://pedro.spyw.com The time here is- http://tinyurl.com/6sfgd 'Be nice to your kids. They'll choose your nursing home!' LOL >> I don't give a sh.t who kills me> > > Ok. Just a sec while I grab the AK47... > After being chastised by Nikki re "top posting" (when I had never heard of > the term) and my dribbling apology, I have now widely explored the issue. > It is clear (to me, that is) that top posting was against netiquette years > ago, and still is with many users. Fair enough. However after exploring > many newsgroups, and asking opinions, the response is 50:50, as it was on > this NG. So in your research, you determined that 50% were retards. That's a very optimistic number :D > I have now looked at the feedback, and I have decided to top post. If you > can't live with this pls put me in your "kill" list. But please all be > accepting of other peoples' right of choice. I suppose you haven't come to appreciate the benefits of posting replies underneath paragraphs... Let's hope we can teach an old dog new tricks :D Signature"Bill Gates is just a monocle and a Persian Cat away from being one of the bad guys in a James Bond movie." -- Dennis Miller > After being chastised by Nikki re "top posting" (when I had never heard of > the term) and my dribbling apology, I have now widely explored the issue. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Regards top posting is one of those minor things that some people seem to get really stressed over speaking for myself, I could not care less if you/me/anyone does it or not, whats in the reply is much more important --- Web: www.sol4.net Jabber: TheMartian@jabber.org.au Block List: sol4.net/spam_blocks.shtml Powered by Apples and Penguins In order not to offend anyone i'll post > top posting is one of those minor things that some people seem to get > really stressed over > > speaking for myself, I could not care less if you/me/anyone does it or > not, whats in the reply is much more important both top and bottom from now on SignaturePeter McCallum Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA > In order not to offend anyone i'll post > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > both top and bottom from now on just think by doing that you can offend both sides of this one :-) --- Web: www.sol4.net Jabber: TheMartian@jabber.org.au Block List: sol4.net/spam_blocks.shtml Powered by Apples and Penguins > In order not to offend anyone i'll post > > > top posting is one of those minor things that some people seem to get > > really stressed over and just for fun and to do some sh.t stirring I'll post in the middle this time - David > > speaking for myself, I could not care less if you/me/anyone does it or > > not, whats in the reply is much more important [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Peter McCallum > Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA LOL > In order not to offend anyone i'll post > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > both top and bottom from now on LOL Aha - someone else who uses common sense, and has the courtesy to put his/her replies where they are most easily read - goodonya Martian David > top posting is one of those minor things that some people seem to get > really stressed over [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Block List: sol4.net/spam_blocks.shtml > Powered by Apples and Penguins > speaking for myself, I could not care less if you/me/anyone does it or > not, whats in the reply is much more important What's in the reply is very important, as well as it's understandability. If you get into any long discussion, you'll find not threading your reply makes it very hard to follow. Dale Signaturedstanbro@spam.o.matic.bigpond.net.au Way to go Old Bloke - there will always be plenty of nancies around who can't handle people who think for themselves instead of following like sheep, but if we just ignore them they will eventually go away, or if they are somewhat wise they will learn to live and let live. David > After being chastised by Nikki re "top posting" (when I had never heard of > the term) and my dribbling apology, I have now widely explored the issue. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Regards > Way to go Old Bloke - there will always be plenty of nancies around who can't > handle people who think for themselves instead of following like sheep, but if > we just ignore them they will eventually go away, or if they are somewhat wise > they will learn to live and let live. There are always going to be self-righteous n00bs who don't get it. I'm staggered these morons actually had enough intelligence to choose a Mac. Signature"Bill Gates is just a monocle and a Persian Cat away from being one of the bad guys in a James Bond movie." -- Dennis Miller > > Way to go Old Bloke - there will always be plenty of nancies around who > > can't [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > I'm staggered these morons actually had enough intelligence to choose a Mac. Well, Jason & I finally agree on something! Whatever next?! Forgive me for using geological sequencing here, and not the system which highlights items which are scatologically referred to as 'floaters', but I thought I'd return to the origins of this thread, which - contrary to some claims - have been largely forgotten. It started with That Old Fool of a newbie crashing in here like a moron shouting 'Hey I just discovered Macs, now what am I gonna do?". Another tradition of Usenet was that you used a little initiative and did some research first. The Old Fart asked no intelligent questions that couldn't have been solved by a trip to a library, or - if the Dewey system is too confusing for him - some simple Googling. Alas - poor Usenet! As the porn comes flooding in, followed by the ads for Viagra (doubtless to assist The Old Bloke to enjoy the porn) the intelligent beginnings of the Unix Users Network seem to have gone out of fashion, and the newcomers are The Real Dregs. The Good Old Days for Mac are clearly over, and most of the Mac groups are full of little more than bickering. And here we have Some Miserable Turd - week after week - complaining about a bit of proceedural advice he was given. And this is The Clever Country? Pig's Arse! I'll take my leave with a closing recommendation for Google, and cite an educational example: if you Google for the string 'stupid australians', the search engine will turn up "about 111,000" instances in 0.4 seconds. Nikita Lvov ... and you can keep the fish. Dear Nikki, Don't you think it is amazing that "a proceedural " (sic) issue, provokes you into calling me a turd, fool, fart, and attacks on my intelligence! Unfortunately, you are degrading this group. Of all the replies you were the *only* one to turn the discussion into a nasty personal attack. Thanks for all the other polite replies Have a nice day, Nikki. >> > Way to go Old Bloke - there will always be plenty of nancies around who >> > can't [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > ... and you can keep the fish. > Dear Nikki, > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Have a nice day, Nikki. I had to use some windows boxes at a job I had once and went online to the aus.computers.windoze, or whatever it is, and started asking some questions. I got flamed really badly by people who called me a blood-sucking leach for wanting to obtain some of their hard earned knowledge. "Well," I thought, "those windows users certainly have issues." I had been on aus.computers.mac for years and had such a pleasant experience of it all. When I needed some parts for the computer, people would just send them to me (no charge). Advice came freely and politely. The community is fantastic. Well that was until nikki arrived I suppose. Don't take any notice of him. Peter SignaturePeter McCallum Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA > > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >community is fantastic. > Well I have just started posting here, and I certainly got the impression that I was moving 'upmarket'. :) >Well that was until nikki arrived I suppose. Don't take any notice of >him. > Ummm... 'hims' a 'her'. Might I recommend boiling in oil, a few knocks around the head with a baseball bat, and a jab or two with with a pointy stick for good measure. A Samurai sword works well too if you happen to have one lying around. Then just bury the remains in the backyard. (Worked quite well for my noisy neighbours). >Peter > > Signaturergds, Pete ----- http://pedro.spyw.com The time here is- http://tinyurl.com/6sfgd 'If IBMs have bugs, do APPLEs have worms?' >The Good Old Days for >Mac are clearly over, and most of the Mac groups are full of little >more than bickering. How is that, at least, any different from the Good Old Days? I've been around since before the endless September kicked in, and bickering was quite well-established by then. Matt (as was proper editing of quoted material, something far too many people these days have forgotten about.) > How is that, at least, any different from the Good Old Days? > I've been around since before the endless September kicked in, > and bickering was quite well-established by then. The good old days (> 10 years ago) had very nice newsgroups, populated by a lot of generous clever people. There are very few of these people still contributing. They have gone on to more interesting things, which is a real pity as I learnt a lot from them. Dale Signaturedstanbro@spam.o.matic.bigpond.net.au >> How is that, at least, any different from the Good Old Days? >> I've been around since before the endless September kicked in, >> and bickering was quite well-established by then. > >The good old days (> 10 years ago) had very nice newsgroups, >populated by a lot of generous clever people. And they still fought a lot. Or they did in many of the groups I was reading back then. They just did it while formatting their posts in the standard way and editing unrequired content from the quoted material. Matt > >The good old days (> 10 years ago) had very nice newsgroups, > >populated by a lot of generous clever people. I believe they are still there. I have had nothing but generosity from this group over the past 15 or so years. It's my first port of call when I have a Mac problem and 95% of the time I have been given great advice. > And they still fought a lot. Or they did in many of the groups > I was reading back then. They just did it while formatting their > posts in the standard way and editing unrequired content from > the quoted material. They did, but it was good stuff. Of course, on some groups such as politics you expect the sledging and the arrant stupidity. But this is the place where any person on a Mac can expect help, even if a few of us don't suffer fools gladly (I do - I know what it's like! ;)). Rifty SignatureAcademic and Computing Help http://rifty.net I won't quote anything Nikki wrote because it's mostly pseudo-intellectual crap. You're probably unemployed Nikki, which gives you the time to write this drivel in the middle of the day. Who really cares about top or bottom posting? In newsgroups where intelligence and content mean something, nobody ever brings it up. It's what is in the message that counts. The not too bright Nikki, Jason and a few others have never been exposed to these groups. They couldn't/wouldn't/shouldn't post because they are not smart enough to contribute. The Old Bloke got it right. Do what feels good for you. I normally bottom post, but I may change tomorrow, and risk eternal damnation. draino (another old bloke who gets really ticked off by stupid people who think they are clever) Hi Draino, I was stunned by two issues with Nikki's response. First was the aggression, and the second was Nikki's assumed superiority. Yes, I agree. I visit a few NGs and the issue has never been raised, except on this NG. I sensed that some felt strongly re top/bottom posting in this NG, so I honestly tried to warn those that would cringe, to "kill" my postings. BYO, I can post during the day because I am retired. Now let's live the issue behind us. Regards One of my favourite saying, "I'd rather be an old fart, than a young dickhead" :-)) > I won't quote anything Nikki wrote because it's mostly pseudo-intellectual > crap. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > draino (another old bloke who gets really ticked off by stupid people who > think they are clever) >Hi Draino, > >I was stunned by two issues with Nikki's response. First was the >aggression, and the second was Nikki's assumed superiority. > wot? You're an Old Bloke and you haven't learned yet that women are superior?? Sure they are.. just ask em! >Yes, I agree. I visit a few NGs and the issue has never been raised, except >on this NG. I sensed that some felt strongly re top/bottom posting in this [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Now let's live the issue behind us. > It's really a very simple matter to understand .. with short posts of one remark and a reply, top posting is inconsequential. But in a long thread involving several contributors it's important that no one starts top posting, because if they do, it will completely stuff up the flow of the discussion. As the thread progresses one won't be able to tell who is replying to whom about what. This is particularly important with a discussion of a technical problem for example. >Regards > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Signaturergds, Pete ----- http://pedro.spyw.com The time here is- http://tinyurl.com/6sfgd 'Beta version: Latin for 'doesn't work yet'' > It's really a very simple matter to understand .. with short posts of > one remark and a reply, top posting is inconsequential. But in a long With short posts of one remark and one reply, if you're going to top-post you might as well *delete the original post*. This is the authoratiative reference on email and usenet quoting style. Read it. http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/email-style.html Cheers, Robert. > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >authoratiative reference on email and usenet quoting style. Read it. > Thanks, but i don't need the attitude. Why would anyone delete a comment they are replying to? It would certainly be inappropriate and bad netiquette to do so. And you have just replied to one comment with one comment, without doing what you suggested- deleting the original comment. So you're not even following your own advice! I have been posting on usernet for 10 years, and don't need any advice on the matter. I follow the normal convention of posting below a reply, and never top post. >http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/email-style.html > >Cheers, Robert. > Signaturergds, Pete ----- http://pedro.spyw.com The time here is- http://tinyurl.com/6sfgd 'Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with the software' On 21/2/05 8:34 PM, in article lzkSd.169997$K7.149542@news-server.bigpond.net.au, "pedro" > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > never top post. > Must be a slow week on the Mac front if everyone is arguing about where to put a response to a newsgroup posting ;-) I know on the WAMUG list people are debating the lack of stock from Apple. One guy's job lies in the balance because of Apple's lack of Xserve stuff! (And he is an end-user, not a dealer). Kind of puts bitching about posting etiquette into perspective..... Dale > Yes, I agree. I visit a few NGs and the issue has never been raised, except > on this NG. I sensed that some felt strongly re top/bottom posting in this > NG, so I honestly tried to warn those that would cringe, to "kill" my > postings. i've seen it on other newsgroups. The fact that it is written in the netiquette rules means that the topic has been debated in the past. I must say that all of the very best newspostings that i've read in very technical computer newsgroups thread their replies throughout the original posting. If there is only one point to follow up, they reply after the point - if there are many it is threaded. These are from pretty clever people who know how to communicate. Signaturedstanbro@spam.o.matic.bigpond.net.au Hi Dale I want this issue to end. I am not strong emotionally and have lost lots of sleep over what is a procedural matter. Netiquette evolved many years ago, when bandwidth was small and it was used mainly by intellectuals. Times change. But forget that! The very personal attacks that I was submitted to on this NG were extreme. What came thru was the belief that Mac users were more intelligent than Intel/PC users, and I was a total idiot. I know many uni Professors, CEOs, Rhodes Scholars that use Intel. In my humble view, these are very intelligent people. The latest figures I have seen is that Apple has 2% of PC users. I am a new Mac user and enjoying it!. If I don't obey a "procedural" matter, pls don't crucify me. Pl s don't! Isn't it trivia? Many of your regular posters "top post" f.ck, I won't sleep again! Regards > Dale > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > reply after the point - if there are many it is threaded. > These are from pretty clever people who know how to communicate. > Hi Dale > > I want this issue to end. I am not strong emotionally and have lost lots of > sleep over what is a procedural matter. Netiquette evolved many years ago, > when bandwidth was small and it was used mainly by intellectuals. Times > change. I would prefer posting throughout an article, but of course you do what you want. I was simply trying to explain why -i- think posting throughout a document is important. > But forget that! The very personal attacks that I was submitted to on this > NG were extreme. What came thru was the belief that Mac users were more > intelligent than Intel/PC users, and I was a total idiot. Yes, and I didn't think they were appropriate. I've been on usenet for over 10 years - the quality dropped quite a lot when people outside of universities got cheap access (i.e. the general public). aus.computers.mac (and quite a lot of the other mac newsgroups) were different to many others. > I know many uni > Professors, CEOs, Rhodes Scholars that use Intel. In my humble view, these > are very intelligent people. The latest figures I have seen is that Apple > has 2% of PC users. I am a new Mac user and enjoying it!. I glad you like what you have. As I said I really don't mind what you do, I was simply trying to explain why I think intermingles posting is better than top (or bottom only!). > If I don't obey a "procedural" matter, pls don't crucify me. ...didn't think i was :-( > Pl s don't! > Isn't it trivia? Many of your regular posters "top post" > > f.ck, I won't sleep again! dale Signaturedstanbro@spam.o.matic.bigpond.net.au > Well, Jason & I finally agree on something! Hmmm.. aren't you worried about that? SignaturePeter McCallum Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA > > Well, Jason & I finally agree on something! > > Hmmm.. aren't you worried about that? He shouldn't be - I'm always right :-P Signature"Bill Gates is just a monocle and a Persian Cat away from being one of the bad guys in a James Bond movie." -- Dennis Miller >And this is The Clever Country? Pig's Arse! I'll take my leave with a >closing recommendation for Google, and cite an educational example: if >you Google for the string 'stupid australians', the search engine will >turn up "about 111,000" instances in 0.4 seconds. > .. and if you Google 'stupid Americans' Google returns 4.45 million hits. So using your methodology, and with a current US population of around 300 million (http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html) that puts their 'stupidity' ratio at 1.5% (in round figures) compared to ours of just 0.5% (110,000/20,000,000) once again in round figures. So maybe we are the 'Clever Country' after all. If not then perhaps the 'Cleverer Country'. :) >Nikita Lvov > >.... and you can keep the fish. > Signaturergds, Pete ----- http://pedro.spyw.com The time here is- http://tinyurl.com/6sfgd 'Don't hassle me. I was dropped at birth' > It started with That Old Fool of a newbie crashing in here like a moron > shouting 'Hey I just discovered Macs, now what am I gonna do?". Another > tradition of Usenet was that you used a little initiative and did some > research first. The Old Fart asked no intelligent questions that > couldn't have been solved by a trip to a library, or - if the Dewey > system is too confusing for him - some simple Googling. I think that "playing the man" should be discouraged. Generally this has been quite a nice news group. We can answer peoples questions and direct them to the right source of information rather than given them a hard time. Dale Signaturedstanbro@spam.o.matic.bigpond.net.au elaD gnitsop. as though there could be a valid reason for the logical structure of a are the conventions for, but just to keep the nancy boys happy? It's not just following the conventions we are taught in school. After all what people actually have to think about what they are reading, rather than Perhaps we could try even more interesting ways of doing things so that something, and then wonder "what question is this the answer to?" asked, answer given. It's so much more interesting to have to read read to have to interesting more much so It's. given answer, asked Question order the in things put and pages web, publications, books lla yb dewollof si taht redor lamron eht wollof yhW. yugteiuq og ot yaW. > Way to go Old Bloke - there will always be plenty of nancies around who can't > handle people who think for themselves instead of following like sheep, but if > we just ignore them they will eventually go away, or if they are somewhat wise > they will learn to live and let live. Signaturedstanbro@spam.o.matic.bigpond.net.au > lla yb dewollof si taht redor lamron eht wollof yhW. yugteiuq og ot yaW. !doog yreV heh heh ytfiR SignatureAcademic and Computing Help http://rifty.net Well, at last Dale is making some sense - arse up of course, but I guess his mum spanked the wrong end when he was born :-) David > > lla yb dewollof si taht redor lamron eht wollof yhW. yugteiuq og ot yaW. Ledgible part snipped > Attachment decoded: untitled-2.txt > --------------050495C6B6C0000918569CE6 [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Attachment decoded: untitled-3.htm > --------------050495C6B6C0000918569CE6-- And those that post HTML to newsgroups are even *worse* than top- posting Old Blokes. Signaturedee Hi to all you good people, Let's lay this thing to rest. I think that this is a great NG! Only a couple of people have upset me. But, heh, sh.t happens!! Even those two are probably good people. Like car drivers. At the wheel some become aggressive, but in normal life are great people. Most people have been wonderful to me as I discover the power of the Mac. Sure, Google can answer a lot but Google searches bring up all the answers including extreme replies. I hope I can continue to ask questions of this NG. I hope I'm not seen as a gate "crasher" as Nikki said. I think Mac users have found the way forward! And Nikki, I hope you will contribute to the help. Thanks to *all* > After being chastised by Nikki re "top posting" (when I had never heard of > the term) and my dribbling apology, I have now widely explored the issue. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Regards |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.