Dale, if your statement was directed to my posting... get a better grip.. i was using the well honed process of SARCASM!!! every so often, on god knows how many forum/threads.. the issue of "correct" posting jumps up... those of us who've been using email since the early 80s no longer really care about the "correct" way.. it seems to bite some email police in the butts though! peace! On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Dale J. Chatham <dale@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Actually, I have had a rather pleasant conversation with a gentleman > offline. It is folks who post things like this which offer nothing > constructive that encourage a flame war. > > Sometimes if you don't have anything useful to contribute, it's just > best, well, not to contribute. > > On 06/14/2010 01:32 PM, bruce wrote: >> oh my gawd!!! >> >> are we doin a top/bottom post flame war again!!! >> >> alright.. all who are frmo san fran.. which do you like, top, or bottom!! >> >> and what about people who like diagonal posting.. >> >> and how about side posting... for those who can't make up their minds... >> >> any others that have been left out?? >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Tim<ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 12:07 -0500, Dale J. Chatham wrote: >>> >>>> But to answer your question, I have *NEVER* posted this way. You're >>>> fighting over 15 years of training to do it otherwise. >>>> >>> Hmm, couldn't have been a real usenet user then... >>> >>> >>>> But, given 15 years, and this being the *ONLY* list (of upward of 50 >>>> that I'm on) that insists on this standard, well, do the math. >>>> >>> And I've been on dozens of lists, of which none of them used top >>> posting. >>> >>> By the way, despite the "bottom posting" name, the idea is *not* to >>> quote all of the prior message and respond under it. But to remove all >>> of the prior post that isn't needed for your reply. Like I've done. >>> >>> Better still, is to intersperse your responses with the bits you're >>> responded to, like I did (otherwise known as "usenet style" posting). >>> >>> Or, for those cases, where you're replying to a huge amount of waffle >>> that defies easy editing, *briefly* summarise it before your response. >>> Those who really need to see the entire prior message can look at the >>> actual prior message. >>> >>> Then the next person gets to read a coherent conversation, top to >>> bottom, and doesn't have to scroll up and down, all over the place, to >>> make sense of replies disconnected from what they're responding to. >>> >>> order. >>> this >>> in >>> conversations >>> read >>> world >>> western >>> mainstream >>> the >>> in >>> us >>> of >>> None >>> >>> We don't put books back to front, nor the paragraphs. >>> >>> -- >>> [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r >>> 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 >>> >>> Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I >>> read messages from the public lists. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> users mailing list >>> users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> To unsubscribe or change subscription options: >>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users >>> Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines >>> >>> > > > -- > Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. > Let us not make it a blank paper by construction." > > --Thomas Jefferson, letter to Wilson Nicholas, 1803 > > There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: > soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. > -- Ed Howdershelt (Author) > > -- > users mailing list > users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe or change subscription options: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users > Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
