Re: Top posting (a different point of view)
On 6/10/05, Phil Dyer <phil@dyermaker.org> wrote:
> I agree with that point exactly.
>
> PS: 2 points for anybody that can figure out which point, or even which
> poster I'm agreeing with.
>
> (I really did try to stay out of this...)
>
> phil
>
> Mark said:
> > Paul Johnson wrote:
> >>> On Thursday June 9 2005 5:10 pm, Patrick Wiseman wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>I completely agree. Whoever (the attribution is not clear to me)
> >>>>wrote that crap about top posters vs bottom posters is an arrogant
> >>>>idiot. Processing information in reverse order is much more
> >>>>efficient
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Do you drive in reverse on the freeway, too? After all, doing it
> >>> backwards is more efficient.
> >
> > Wait a minute, When you read a book. You start on page one and read
> > right to the back of the book (Or bottom of the book) when you
> > finish. Right?
> >
> > Same (should) go for emails, you start at the top with reading, and
> > end up at the bottom where youre email answer begins.
> >
> > Is that not the best way of making it easier for other people to
> > understand your email?
> >
> > Still, bottom posters may be fighting a lost battle. In all the
> > companies i've worked for so far, there has not been a single
> > company with a "bottom" post policy of any kind.
> >
> > These companies are usually the "exchange server" kind...
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> >
> > p.s.
> > Sorry Paul, for replying to you alone...
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
This whole thing has brought up such a great feature of gmail - quoted
text is hidden away until you want to see it. I can't even tell the
difference between bottom posting and top posting most of the time. :D
Reply to: