Re: BBC's awful tech/mydoom coverage
From: John Winters (newstmp_at_sinodun.org.uk)
Date: 02/07/04
- Next message: Peter Nolan: "Re: Charitable contributions?"
- Previous message: Bill: "Differences between SUWsndmu & SUNWsndmr"
- In reply to: Jim Slager: "Re: BBC's awful tech/mydoom coverage"
- Next in thread: Ed Murphy: "Re: BBC's awful tech/mydoom coverage"
- Reply: Ed Murphy: "Re: BBC's awful tech/mydoom coverage"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 22:57:23 +0000 (GMT)
In article <Okx46nC7DHA.2264@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
Jim Slager <jslager@inameU_NO_WHATcom> wrote:
>Jupiter, thanks for the post. It seems to me that top posting makes sense
>if you're not replying to what the previous poster said but, rather,
>starting a new approach to the original post.
No, for goodness sake - of course it doesn't.
If you are not replying to what the previous poster said then you don't
need to quote anything at all. If you do need to quote something to
give context to your additions then put your comments immediately after
the relevant bit. It's as simple as that.
>But, I guess it is a matter of personal taste.
No, it isn't. There are three ways of following up to a Usenet post
(in order from worst to best).
1) Quote the entirety of the previous message and tag your comments on
the end. Doesn't really exist but is cited by the exponents of
method 2 (below) to try to prove that their way isn't the worst
possible way of doing it.
2) Quote the entirety of the previous message and put your comments
at the beginning - aka "Top posting". Wastes a phenomenal amount
of bandwidth and obscures the flow of conversation. Also obscures
the point of what the poster is trying to say because you can't
tell what (if anything) their comments relate to.
3) The correct way - quote the minimum necessary to give context to
your comments and pair off each comment with the bit of quoted
text to which it relates. Easy to read. Saves bandwidth. Keeps
the flow of conversation going.
Please try to learn.
John
-- Wallingford, Oxfordshire, England We had a woodhenge here once but it rotted.
- Next message: Peter Nolan: "Re: Charitable contributions?"
- Previous message: Bill: "Differences between SUWsndmu & SUNWsndmr"
- In reply to: Jim Slager: "Re: BBC's awful tech/mydoom coverage"
- Next in thread: Ed Murphy: "Re: BBC's awful tech/mydoom coverage"
- Reply: Ed Murphy: "Re: BBC's awful tech/mydoom coverage"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|