[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Top posting (a different point of view)



on Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 09:09:25PM -0400, Patrick Wiseman (pwiseman@gmail.com) wrote:
> On 6/10/05, Carl Fink <carlf@fink.to> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 12:46:20PM -0700, Caleb Walker wrote:
> > > Carl Fink wrote:
> > >
> > > >Just out of curiosity:  you do realize that "LCD" is an insult, right?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > What is LCD?
> > 
> > Least Common Denominator.
> 
> _Lowest_ Common Denominator where I grew up

In math (or maths, ifs yous plurals yours words), it's *greatest* common
denominator.

The _least_ common denominator of any given value is of course, 1.

The _greatest_ common denominator is that value which all entities have
in common.  It's a ceiling of compatibility, above which there isn't
commonality.

Common usage has reversed the term, for odd reasons.

> Those of us who do _not_ require information to be presented in linear
> order in order to process it are in a rather small minority, it seems,
> and so it would be pretty absurd for a forum like this to accommodate
> _us_.  But I'm still a bit surprised that tech folks are so linear -

The mmajor issue is that mixed-mode posting really *really* sucks.
Inevitably:

  - ObAOL posts quoting 500+ lines of unnecessary context are made.

  - Different citation styles make it impossible to track who said what.
    Those '> ' markers aren't just there for decoration.

  - Tracking who's saying what in response to whom gets very difficult.
    Generally there's a total mash of text.

My own response is to not participate in lists / groups in which this
mode of communications is commonplace.  It's too much work, s/n is way
low, and the population tends not to be trainable.


Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com>        http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
    Sony-Betamax / did not rule on shifting to / ten million people.
    - Haiku Betamax

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: