What does Python fix?

[Steve Holden]

"JMarttila" <martti at bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:101aca4.0201180912.288820ce at posting.google.com...
> (Inserts cursor at top, inserts a blank line, begins typing)
>
Sigh.

> Thank you Mark. I often read newsgroups through Google, as I am doing
> now. I usually want to scream. "PLEASE TOP POST!" When I read a
> newsgroup, I have already read the discussion. So I vastly prefer when
> someone just puts their response AT THE TOP. I don't have to wade
> through vast amounts of quoted text which I ALREADY READ. And I
> already know WHO SAID WHAT! So a simple, "I agree with Mark's point",
> or "Jim's point about xxxx I disagree with and here's why." works much
> better for me. On Google, since it seems as many as 25% of the posts
> lead of with a large chunk of quoted text, to read the actual new
> content of the message I have to click on "read more of this message".
> Usually when I do that I find a "yes, I agree" at the bottom of the
> vast quote. Argh! So I've discovered that the best remedy for me is to
> just ignore all messages that lead off by quoting so much of the
> discussion (Which I already read! Get it?) that they need me to click
> to see more. I find those posters usually don't have anything to add
> anyway.
>
Well, right. People who don't have the wit or ability to SELECTIVELY edit
what they are responding to probably deserve to be ignored. Particularly if
all they have to say is "me, too" -- who cares?

But you are swimming against the tide, in a more-than-probably-futile
attempt to reverse accepted netiquette practices because you disagree with
them (which you are free to do), and being rude (which you are also free to
do) by ignoring the accepted practice.

> Of course, ideally, I prefer the people who are so intelligent and
> courteous that they respond inline, with minimal amounts of quoted
> material. But if you can't do that, please top post. I've already read
> the rest of the damn discussion. I even prefer this method when I am
> using a proper newsreader.
>
You appear to completely ignore the poor readers who HAVEN'T read "the rest
of the damn[ed] discussion". Suppose somebody wants to forward a single
message from a thread you've contributed to. The poor reader then has to
read your contribution out of order. Which it is, in more than one sense.

In other words: "don't do that".

> Now, if you are not sure what message I am responding to, please see
> the material below.
>
> John Marttila
>
> BTW- I also really hate when discussions veer far off topic. Which I
> am contributing to here. But that is a minor evil compared to bottom
> posting.
>
Well, give me the major evil of people adhering to accepted standards any
time. We are used to threads verring off-topic on thislist. We are less used
to wilful ignorance of netiquette, but usually polite enough to accept most
behaviors without comment. You must have just caught me on a bad day :-)

> "Mark McEahern" <marklists at mceahern.com> wrote in message
news:<mailman.1011314607.18477.python-list at python.org>...
> > Paul Jackson wrote:
> > > Does someone have a simple explanation of why such
> > > top posting is bad form?  I don't like it either,
> > > but I am unable to articulate why I don't like it.
> >
[...etc...]

regards
 Steve
--
Consulting, training, speaking: http://www.holdenweb.com/
Python Web Programming: http://pydish.holdenweb.com/pwp/