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

Re: [OT] Posting styles



Chris Bannister wrote:
On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 02:58:24PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
On Sat, 07 Apr 2012 06:11:19 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 04:03:05PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
Bottom posting has been since long the preferred method for newsgroups
and then mailing lists but not for forums nor business communications.

A bottom posting style does not mean "all the stuff goes to the bottom"
Yes it does! That is what bottom posting is.
No sir, is just the name what is misleading. "Bottom posting" also
applies for an inline style. Regardless its name, the main idea remains
the same: the reply goes below of the text you are responding.
So what's it called when you plonk everything at the bottom, oops sorry,
at the very end? End posting?

There is also "conversation style" or "interleaved style" which is the
tried and proven preferred way for mailing lists; i.e the style you and
many others use.
That's also bottom posting ;-)
No, you are confused. There are three entirely different distinct styles:
1) Top posting
2) Bottom posting
3) Interleaved, inline, conversation. style.

Therefore, it makes sense to have *THREE* different definitions.
correct?

Though it's worth pointing out that the terms "interleaved, inline, conversation, etc." are relatively new - reflecting, perhaps, a longer-standing practice. I can remember religious arguments about top vs. bottom posting back to ARPANET and USENET days. This is actually the first time I've see the more nuanced "interleaved" style explicitly identified in one of these threads.

Miles Fidelman



--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra



Reply to: