Re: Top posting
- To: debian-testing@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Top posting
- From: Hendrik Boom <hendrik@pooq.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 12:54:57 -0400
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20050610165457.GC18321@pooq.com>
- In-reply-to: <200506101059.46915.hal@thresholddigital.com>
- References: <20050609165536.GA2799@jardine.de> <200506092011.13324.hal@thresholddigital.com> <1118387152.223957.237760@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <200506101059.46915.hal@thresholddigital.com>
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 10:59:46AM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> On Friday 10 June 2005 03:05 am, Basajaun wrote:
> > Hal Vaughan wrote:
> > > On Thursday 09 June 2005 05:26 pm, Alex Malinovich wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 22:06 +0100, Graham Smith wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > > I would argue that top-posters fall into the same category as most
> > > > users of proprietary software. They are too lazy expend a bit of effort
> > > > to benefit their fellow man. Bottom-posting makes reading easier for
> > > > those who haven't followed an entire thread. Much in the same way that
> > > > users of proprietary software are too lazy to find, support, or write a
> > > > free alternative that would benefit all of mankind.
> >
> > [snip[
> >
> > > That's the most self-serving, self-centered, one-sided point of view I've
> > > read on any tech list in years. In 3 paragraphs, you manage to insult
> > > users of proprietary software a number of ways, calling them self
> > > centered over and over, and say how FOSS people are more world oriented
> > > and less self-centered.
> > >
> > > Yet, while you are going on and on calling others self-centered, you are
> > > totally incapable of seeing how "Me! Me! Me!" your point of view is. As
> > > long as people follow your rules, they are open minded. People who don't
> > > are closed minded. So does it not occur to you that many people think
> > > differently than you, so top posting may work better for you?
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > Yes, and many people could choose to believe that Mars is closer to the
> > Sun than the Earth, yet it would not make it true, would it?
>
> And that has what to do with the price of tea in China?
>
> Oh, nothing. I get it. Just your way of saying you think something is a fact
> when it is an opinion. There's a big difference between fact and opinion and
> you don't see that your "2 euro cents" is an opinion, not a fact.
>
> > Bottom-posting plus trimming _is_ the Good Thing to do, period. It is
> > not a matter of preferences. It is not a matter of your social
> > background, your language, your religion or your pet's name. Opinions
> > are like... well, everyone has one. But when talking about facts,
> > either something is true or it is not. Someone's opinion about a fact
> > is not worth as much as some other's one. Simply one is right, and the
> > other one is wrong, and millions of people preaching the wrong thing
> > don't make it right, just as the right thing is not so because some
> > others support it. The right thing is the right thing.
>
> Again, that's your opinion, also the opinion of others. From this thread,
> it's clear it is not everyone's opinion. Yes, it is the accepted practice on
> the net from way back, but that does not make it the best or only way to
> post. Insisting we have to stick with something because there are some who
> say it is the best or because it's tradition does not make your opinion fact.
What's *really* hard to read isn't a top-posted discussion or a
bottom/middle-posted discussion, but a discussion in which people do
*both*.
-- hendrik
Reply to: