Corey Head wrote:
Top posting has been a separate thread for a while now. If you have bothered to look at any of the messages exchanged on the thread you were aware of the list convention before receiving Alexander's reply. If you have bothered to read much of anything on this list you would have noticed that the predominant method of responding to messages is to place responses FOLLOWING the text prompting the response.<On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:19:46 -0500, Phil Labonte <plabonte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: I still fail to understand how top posting "interferes with the flow", if you read the original post why do you have to include it in your replies?>
I have to agree...but either way, top or bottom, if
this is the 'etiquette' of the list, perhaps that
could be explained to someone when they subscribe--not
just getting snubbed when you top-post unknowingly.
This is a rule I'm unfamiliar with--being new to the
mail-list game. Don't just snub people about it (yes
I'm talking to you Alexander Dalloz--see "Possible
Apache or Squirrelmail Bug?" thread)--let someone know
and then perhaps they won't do it anymore.
In light of the ongoing thread about top posting, you are going to have a tough time convincing a lot of other people on this list that you were totally unaware of the list convention before you responded to Alexander's second reply to your inconsiderate demands for further immediate attention.
AndYour attack on Alexander is TOTALLY unwarranted and suggests to this reader that you are one clueless, conceited, immature, inconsiderate, self-centered, picky beggar. What makes you think that Alexander "owed" you a response of any kind to any of your questions? What makes you think you are entitled to anything at all from Alexander or from anyone else on this list????
yes--you can do it in a nice way Mr. Dalloz! (See--I've already learned my lesson here!)
Corey
The gist of your remarks indicates that you have only begun to learn.
