GEN-MEDIEVAL-L ArchivesArchiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2000-01 > 0947188821
From: "A.Colthirst" <>
Subject: Re: Nuts, Freaks & Incompetents
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 15:00:21 -0500
Personally I vote for TOP - but maybe their mailing systems can not be
changed - mine automatically puts me on TOP ( (Ham Ha!)
wrote in message
>John Davies <> writes:
>>Scot Austin <> writes
>>>While I certainly agree with snipping irrevalent portions of a post when
>>>responding, I suggest that you are posting upside down, forcing readers
>>>scroll through previously read material to find whether or not your reply
>>I'm completely at a loss to understand why people think that new
>>material first is a more natural convention.
>>It is particularly
>>nonsensical when one is answering several points in a previous posters'
>>message, where the common-sense order is older material first, followed
>>by new comment or rebuttal, followed by second point requiring comment,
>>and so on. And sometimes it's desirable to refer to extracts from
>>earlier messages, not just the immediate predecessor; surely
>>chronological order is the natural one in such instances?
>Clearly in this case it makes more sense to intersperce (sp?) comments
>as appropriate, but if a short general comment is being made, or if
>for some reason the poster wants to include the entirety of the
>original post then I think that putting original material at the
>beginning makes sense.
>If the poster cuts out the irrelevant and keeps everything easily
>legible (e.g. no over-long lines) I am willing to put up with
>having the comments at the top or the bottom.
|Re: Nuts, Freaks & Incompetents by "A.Colthirst" <>|