To All Newsgroup Posters - Configuration of Replies

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by measekite, Dec 24, 2004.

  1. measekite

    measekite Guest

    There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
    all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
    and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.

    One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
    front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
    stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.

    The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
    quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
    when you continually follow a thread.

    When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have
    to spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.

    I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
    reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have
    to scroll down. This made the most sense.

    I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
    consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that
    I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of uniformity.
    measekite, Dec 24, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. measekite

    Ryadia Guest

    And the flood gates shall open and the torrent shall enshew. God bless
    Usenet!


    "measekite" <> wrote in message
    news:2iRyd.2113$...
    > There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
    > all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
    > and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.
    >
    > One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
    > front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
    > stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.
    >
    > The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
    > quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
    > when you continually follow a thread.
    >
    > When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have
    > to spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.
    >
    > I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
    > reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have
    > to scroll down. This made the most sense.
    >
    > I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
    > consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that
    > I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of uniformity.



    And the flood gates shall open and the torrent shall enshew. God bless
    Usenet!
    Ryadia, Dec 24, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. measekite

    MaryL Guest

    I actually prefer top-posting (and am doing so here because that is also
    your preference). However, most of the responses I have seen to this type
    of message on other newsgroups indicate a preference for bottom-posting.
    Therefore, this has become my "style": (1) I usually bottom-post, with
    selective snipping, if no one has previously top-posted; (2) If top-posting
    has occurred first, then I follow suit; (3) I will occasionally interleave
    responses within a message (leaving the > marker to indicate messages from
    previous readers). I agree that it is a real annoyance to have to
    continually scroll down to the bottom, especially if it is a long message
    and there has been no attempt to reduce the length by snipping.

    MaryL


    "measekite" <> wrote in message
    news:2iRyd.2113$...
    > There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and all
    > newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally and
    > that makes it difficult to read longer threads.
    >
    > One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
    > front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
    > stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.
    >
    > The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
    > quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
    > when you continually follow a thread.
    >
    > When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have to
    > spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.
    >
    > I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
    > reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have to
    > scroll down. This made the most sense.
    >
    > I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
    > consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that I
    > at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of uniformity.
    MaryL, Dec 24, 2004
    #3
  4. measekite

    dylan Guest

    "I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of
    uniformity."

    Dream On.... :eek:)

    (Posted again at the end for bottom feeders..)

    "measekite" <> wrote in message
    news:2iRyd.2113$...
    > There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and all
    > newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally and
    > that makes it difficult to read longer threads.
    >
    > One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
    > front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
    > stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.
    >
    > The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
    > quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
    > when you continually follow a thread.
    >
    > When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have to
    > spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.
    >
    > I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
    > reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have to
    > scroll down. This made the most sense.
    >
    > I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
    > consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that I
    > at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of uniformity.


    "I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of
    uniformity."

    Dream On... :eek:)

    (Posted again at the top for the other 50%..)
    dylan, Dec 24, 2004
    #4
  5. measekite

    Randy Howard Guest

    In article <2iRyd.2113$>,
    says...
    > There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
    > all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
    > and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.


    Here we go again...

    BTW, there is an RFC that states the correct method is bottom-posting.
    SO, it's an internet standard. This is usually only an issue with
    those that are new to usenet. Once you have tried to sort out what
    someone is replying to a few thousand times, you'll learn as well.

    Further, top-posters seem to be extremely taken with not snipping
    any text below their reply, a horrible waste of bandwidth, not
    to mention making it even more difficult to determine specifically
    what they are responding to in the original.
    Randy Howard, Dec 24, 2004
    #5
  6. measekite

    Guest

    Kibo informs me that measekite <> stated that:

    >One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
    >front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
    >stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.


    The correct, more considerate method is to snip out all of the text in
    the original post, except for the part that you're actually responding
    to - just as I've done in this post. It's also the traditional Usenet
    format, because it makes conversations easier to follow, both at the
    time, & later on.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
    , Dec 24, 2004
    #6
  7. measekite

    Guest

    Kibo informs me that "MaryL" <-OUT-THE-LITTER>
    stated that:

    >I actually prefer top-posting (and am doing so here because that is also
    >your preference). However, most of the responses I have seen to this type
    >of message on other newsgroups indicate a preference for bottom-posting.
    >Therefore, this has become my "style": (1) I usually bottom-post, with
    >selective snipping,


    That is very well-mannered of you. :)

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
    , Dec 24, 2004
    #7
  8. >>There are two ways to configure your software for replies
    >>on this and all newsgroups.

    What software are you assuming that I am using?

    I use Microsoft Outlook Express. I am prepared to be told that I am
    mistaken but I cannot see any way to affect whether my replies appear before
    or after earlier responses.

    Regards
    Keith
    Keith Sheppard, Dec 24, 2004
    #8
  9. Randy Howard wrote:
    > In article <2iRyd.2113$>,
    > says...
    >> There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
    >> all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about
    >> equally and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.

    >
    > Here we go again...
    >
    > BTW, there is an RFC that states the correct method is bottom-posting.
    > SO, it's an internet standard.


    Can you provide a reference for that RFC, please?
    I briefly looked for one when the question was first asked, but I couldn't
    find one.

    David
    David J Taylor, Dec 24, 2004
    #9
  10. measekite

    Pete D Guest

    ROFL

    "Ryadia" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > And the flood gates shall open and the torrent shall enshew. God bless
    > Usenet!
    >
    >
    > "measekite" <> wrote in message
    > news:2iRyd.2113$...
    >> There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
    >> all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
    >> and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.
    >>
    >> One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
    >> front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
    >> stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.
    >>
    >> The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
    >> quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
    >> when you continually follow a thread.
    >>
    >> When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have
    >> to spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.
    >>
    >> I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
    >> reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have
    >> to scroll down. This made the most sense.
    >>
    >> I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
    >> consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that
    >> I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of
    >> uniformity.

    >
    >
    > And the flood gates shall open and the torrent shall enshew. God bless
    > Usenet!
    >
    >
    Pete D, Dec 24, 2004
    #10
  11. "David J Taylor" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    SNIP
    >> BTW, there is an RFC that states the correct method is
    >> bottom-posting.
    >> SO, it's an internet standard.

    >
    > Can you provide a reference for that RFC, please?
    > I briefly looked for one when the question was first asked, but I
    > couldn't find one.


    http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html

    And a quote from that:
    3.1.1 General Guidelines for mailing lists and NetNews
    If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
    summarize the original at the top of the message, or include
    just
    enough text of the original to give a context. This will make
    sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
    Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
    postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a
    response to a message before seeing the original. Giving
    context
    helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!

    Bart
    Bart van der Wolf, Dec 24, 2004
    #11
  12. "Keith Sheppard" <> wrote in message
    news:CiSyd.89$...
    >>>There are two ways to configure your software for replies
    >>>on this and all newsgroups.

    > What software are you assuming that I am using?
    >
    > I use Microsoft Outlook Express. I am prepared to be told that I am
    > mistaken but I cannot see any way to affect whether my replies
    > appear before
    > or after earlier responses.


    Does your keyboard have arrow keys?

    Bart
    Bart van der Wolf, Dec 24, 2004
    #12
  13. Bart van der Wolf wrote:
    []
    -----------------------------
    3.1.1 General Guidelines for mailing lists and NetNews

    If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize
    the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the
    original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when
    they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is
    proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is
    possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original.
    Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!
    -----------------------------

    Sounds clear enough to me. Thanks, Bart.

    David
    David J Taylor, Dec 24, 2004
    #13
  14. measekite

    Don Dunlap Guest

    Here we go again. I am not new to usenet, but I prefer top posting. I
    prefer it because of the reasons stated in the original post. I top post,
    bottom post and post within the message depending on the content and which
    side of the bed I got up on that day.

    You say that top-posters seem to be extremely taken with not snipping any
    test below their reply. Bottom posters are worse in that you generally have
    to scroll down through 10 pages of consecutive replies to get to their 3
    word response at the bottom. If bottom posters were diligent about
    snipping, it wouldn't be so bad, but most will claim that they snip, but in
    reality, don't - except when it is a thread about bottom posting. Then they
    are diligent about it because it is foremost in their minds.

    I believe that the problem will never go away, so just ride with the flow
    and don't get so anal about it. It doesn't really cause anyone to implode
    or cause the weather to change. Relax!

    Don Dunlap
    "Randy Howard" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <2iRyd.2113$>,
    >
    > says...
    >> There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
    >> all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
    >> and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.

    >
    > Here we go again...
    >
    > BTW, there is an RFC that states the correct method is bottom-posting.
    > SO, it's an internet standard. This is usually only an issue with
    > those that are new to usenet. Once you have tried to sort out what
    > someone is replying to a few thousand times, you'll learn as well.
    >
    > Further, top-posters seem to be extremely taken with not snipping
    > any text below their reply, a horrible waste of bandwidth, not
    > to mention making it even more difficult to determine specifically
    > what they are responding to in the original.
    >
    Don Dunlap, Dec 24, 2004
    #14
  15. measekite wrote:
    > There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
    > all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
    > and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.
    >
    > One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material
    > up front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the
    > latest stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.
    >
    > The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
    > quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new
    > stuff when you continually follow a thread.
    >


    Then there is the third method of placing the response within the
    original message where it would make the best sense.

    > When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first
    > have to spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.
    >
    > I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
    > reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not
    > have to scroll down. This made the most sense.
    >
    > I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
    > consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow
    > that I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of
    > uniformity.


    I believe that communication is less of a science than an art. As an
    art, it will never be static and pined down by a set of rules. I follow the
    cat's philosophy of live. If it feels good do it. In this context, if it
    works do it.

    The objective is to communicate, not to follow a set of rules. A rule
    is only good if it improves the communication. Rules demanding top or bottom
    posting do not improve communication, they just increase the amount of it.

    --
    Joseph Meehan

    26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
    Joseph Meehan, Dec 24, 2004
    #15
  16. measekite

    Pete D Guest

    Probably! But really no one actually gives a shit!

    "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote in message
    news:41cbfe6b$0$6206$4all.nl...
    >
    > "Keith Sheppard" <> wrote in message
    > news:CiSyd.89$...
    >>>>There are two ways to configure your software for replies
    >>>>on this and all newsgroups.

    >> What software are you assuming that I am using?
    >>
    >> I use Microsoft Outlook Express. I am prepared to be told that I am
    >> mistaken but I cannot see any way to affect whether my replies appear
    >> before
    >> or after earlier responses.

    >
    > Does your keyboard have arrow keys?
    >
    > Bart
    Pete D, Dec 24, 2004
    #16
  17. measekite

    Pete D Guest

    So it's more a guidline than a hard and fast rule???

    "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote in message
    news:41cbfe06$0$6218$4all.nl...
    >
    > "David J Taylor" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > SNIP
    >>> BTW, there is an RFC that states the correct method is bottom-posting.
    >>> SO, it's an internet standard.

    >>
    >> Can you provide a reference for that RFC, please?
    >> I briefly looked for one when the question was first asked, but I
    >> couldn't find one.

    >
    > http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html
    >
    > And a quote from that:
    > 3.1.1 General Guidelines for mailing lists and NetNews
    > If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
    > summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
    > enough text of the original to give a context. This will make
    > sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
    > Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
    > postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a
    > response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context
    > helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!
    >
    > Bart
    >
    Pete D, Dec 24, 2004
    #17
  18. measekite

    Ron Hunter Guest

    measekite wrote:
    > There are two ways to configure your software for replies on this and
    > all newsgroups. I have seen both on this newsgroup used about equally
    > and that makes it difficult to read longer threads.
    >
    > One way is to place your reply at the end with the previous material up
    > front. You then have to scroll down to the bottom to read the latest
    > stuff. A pain if you continually follow threads.
    >
    > The other method is to place your reply at the top with the previously
    > quoted material below. This makes it easier to read only the new stuff
    > when you continually follow a thread.
    >
    > When people use both methods it makes it difficult since you first have
    > to spend time to acertain where the new stuff is.
    >
    > I started out placing my reply at the end but switched to placing the
    > reply at the beginning so people who followed the thread would not have
    > to scroll down. This made the most sense.
    >
    > I would like to know what others think. While I would rather see a
    > consensus of placing the reply at the top and have everyone follow that
    > I at least would like to see a consensus and have some kind of uniformity.


    End. How many start a book at the last page and read forward?


    --
    Ron Hunter
    Ron Hunter, Dec 24, 2004
    #18
  19. "Pete D" <> wrote:

    > So it's more a guidline than a hard and fast rule???


    What is???

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Dec 24, 2004
    #19
  20. measekite

    Pete D Guest

    Sorry but you will have to read the post.


    > What is???
    >
    > David J. Littleboy
    > Tokyo, Japan
    >
    >
    >
    Pete D, Dec 24, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Your Worst Nightmare

    Block Posters

    Your Worst Nightmare, Oct 1, 2004, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    470
    Leonidas Jones
    Oct 1, 2004
  2. 'Ole
    Replies:
    26
    Views:
    1,301
  3. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=

    Where have all the posters gone?

    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=, May 23, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    30
    Views:
    1,008
    William Poaster
    May 24, 2007
  4. janet
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,734
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty
    Dec 17, 2007
  5. Donchano
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    290
    Donchano
    Sep 4, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page