On 22/06/11 21:53, Camaleón wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 11:49:05 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>> On 21/06/11 23:29, CamaleÃ³n wrote:
>>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 09:21:01 -0300, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
>>>> But at least you did not reply to a digest.
>>> Sure. I'd say digests are for reading more than replying.
And I am in absolute agreement with you!
Perhaps if I said what I meant it'd be less confusing ;-p
If someone feels the need to subscribe to the "digest" version - which
is not one "bit" smaller than all the individual messages - it's no
excuse to send badly formatted replies full of irrelevant material with
useless subject lines - to the list! (how's that?).
But then - I also believe if someone top posts there *is* something
wrong. Likewise posting in HTML. Or posting to the list because they are
unable to do something, but then insisting on rudely declaring how
something must be done (and still expecting respect).
>Q: Are you sure?
>>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?