On 12.04.2013, at 6:01PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal <chris.barker@noaa.gov> wrote:
Maybe we need a short-hand for "clean up the previous parts of the thread to show only what you need to make your post relevant and clear"
+1
Paul Ivanof wrote:
... But I just came across a wonderfully short signature from Rick Moen, and thought I'd pass it along:
Cheers, A: Yes. Rick Moen > Q: Are you sure? rick@linuxmafia >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. .com McQ! (4x80) >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
This is cute, and makes a good point, but misses the bigger issue: most interesting technical threads are not a series of linear, simple one-liners. Bottom posting is obviously the way to go for that. They are long, with multiple points, and comments on the middle parts, not just the end, and different people all commenting on the same post. It simply does not end up a neat linear conversation anyway. niether pure bottom posting nor pure top posting works well.
Absolutely, I did not intend to suggest posting everything at the bottom of one monolithic quote (even if shortened), but following the corresponding sub-threads of the conversation (and tried to give a better example this time ;-). Cheers, Derek