[RFI] Original message and replying

[Hisashi T Fujinaka]

It depends on the list, and whether you're using a mobile device and/or
Outlook.

It's all personal preference nowadays. On the Elecraft list, for
example, the list moderator has an iPhone, I think, and asks for top
posting.

On Fri, 20 Jan 2012, Andy wrote:

> dalej wrote:
>> Actually, top-posting is the preferred method.  ...
>
> I never heard of that proclamation!
>
> As far as this reader is concerned, it is definitely not preferred.
>
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style>
>
> While I haven't read it top-to-bottom yet, I don't see anything
> standing out that says top-posting is preferred.  Anyway if it did,
> it's Wikipedia, guys.  It is someone's opinion and will likely change
> again.
>
> For me, English is the language I use, so I read left-to-right, then
> top-to-bottom.  So I want to read my emails that way too.  There
> should be no need to glance to the bottom of the message or scan down
> and up and down to figure out the context of the reply.  It should
> state the context first, then add what's new.  Would you put the
> Subject at the bottom of the message?
>
> But hey, that is MY preference and it doesn't need to be yours.  But
> I'll be damned if someone tells me top-posting is THE preferred
> method.
>
> OTOH, top-posting is easier to read if you don't bother to trim your
> posts.  Still, two wrongs don't make it right.
>
> Usenet?  What's that?  (He-he, yes I know.  And I used it a little
> too.  But I got my habits from email, not Usenet.  Usenet came later.)
>
> I think the reason many people use top-posting, is simply because
> that's where email programs position the cursor, and they are too lazy
> to (a) trim unnecessary stuff, and (b) move the cursor.  If Microsoft
> had put the cursor at the bottom, we might be saying the opposite.
>
> Trimming messages goes without saying.  Just do it ... selectively ... smartly.

-- 
Hisashi T Fujinaka - htodd at twofifty.com
BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 = latte