[clue-tech] Top down

[Collins Richey]

On 4/24/05, Chris Tubutis <ctubutis at yahoo.com> wrote:

[ snips ]

> On 24 Apr, mike havlicek wrote:
> > This policy of top down design seems kinda silly...
> 

> But that's not at all the case with list-based e-mail where multiple,
> unknown people and several topics & threads are involved. 
> 
> Netiquette involves more than just top-posting vs. bottom-posting but
> also trimming out irrelevant & excess text (especially signatures and
> extra cruft automatically added by list software). Quote only pertinent
> points you are responding to.

Gee, Chris, pretty soon David will have you figured as the officially
appointed "netiquette host' <grin>. Welcome to the club!

> 
> For a good example, look at the Gilligan's Island example at
> <http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/nquote.html>; although these
> "rules" and this Netiquette stuff originated mainly in Usenet
> newsgroups, the same concepts apply to e-mail lists (which are basically
> newsgroup messages that end up in your Inbox).
> 

Yep, pretty much the same as the other variants I posted. In spite of
the fact that I broached the topic, I've found (across several lists
and years) that it does little good to stress the appropriate way of
doing things. Top posters are usually top posters "because they can,"
and to hell with anyone who thinks differently. One jerk (my $.02) on
another group always ends his posts with "Go back to the top; I always
top post."

OTOH, I do get pissed from titme to time when I encounter mails with
11 lines of meaningful data and 103 lines of quoted trash at the
bottom of the mail. Sigh! I'm sure the modem users like you don't
appreciate this either.

-- 
 Collins
       Live until you die.