"Bob" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote:

> Even with a one word answer top posting works fine

You just proved it isn't.


--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org

Well said, Richard!

--
--
John Barnett MVP
Associate Expert
Windows - Shell/User

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..

"Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23SZjOkaZIHA.3652@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Why? Top posting is easier and faster when reading replies in a thread. No
> having to scroll down to the bottom to read a reply. I've never understood
> why anyone would bottom post. I own some newsgroups and everyone
> has always top posted their replies. It's the common sense natural way to
> do
> it, and it would never even occur to anyone on our groups to bottom post a
> reply. Sometimes the threads can get quite long and it would be a huge
> waste
> of time if we had to scroll down to read the next reply in each message if
> people bottom posted their replies. It would be crazy to use bottom
> posting
> with a thread that might have replies a dozen levels deep. With top
> posting
> you can read the thread and follow the conversation quickly and easily.
> I'm
> wondering...do you group your messages by conversation? I use OE in XP and
> Windows Mail in Vista as newsreaders and have always grouped messages by
> conversation.
>
> Richard
>
>
> "john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9A366DD825877jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.n et...
> I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop
> the
> top posting, bottom post please.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

John Barnett MVP wrote:

> Well said, Richard!
>
Except he hasn't got a clue about what he's saying. No wonder you'd
appreciate it. BTW, your top posting results in this ...

Cheers.

PS. So he "owns" a number of newsgroups. That makes a lot of sense, doesn't
it Mr. MVP?

--
Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4...nceMonitor.jpg

California 5150 Notice:

All attempts to try and convince Frank to seek help for his mental
problems have failed. The State of California has no option left but
to issue the following 5150 order within the next 24 hours.
http://tinyurl.com/y2y66g

Thanks!

Richard


"John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:773448EF-F12A-470A-8788-29FA41824CCB@microsoft.com...
Well said, Richard!

--
--
John Barnett MVP
Associate Expert
Windows - Shell/User

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..

"Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23SZjOkaZIHA.3652@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Why? Top posting is easier and faster when reading replies in a thread. No
> having to scroll down to the bottom to read a reply. I've never understood
> why anyone would bottom post. I own some newsgroups and everyone
> has always top posted their replies. It's the common sense natural way to
> do
> it, and it would never even occur to anyone on our groups to bottom post a
> reply. Sometimes the threads can get quite long and it would be a huge
> waste
> of time if we had to scroll down to read the next reply in each message if
> people bottom posted their replies. It would be crazy to use bottom
> posting
> with a thread that might have replies a dozen levels deep. With top
> posting
> you can read the thread and follow the conversation quickly and easily.
> I'm
> wondering...do you group your messages by conversation? I use OE in XP and
> Windows Mail in Vista as newsreaders and have always grouped messages by
> conversation.
>
> Richard
>
>
> "john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9A366DD825877jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.n et...
> I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop
> the
> top posting, bottom post please.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least
12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you saying
that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all
bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.
What say you?

Richard


"NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:fo31kt11j5h@news2.newsguy.com...

Except he hasn't got a clue about what he's saying. No wonder you'd
appreciate it. BTW, your top posting results in this ...

Cheers.

PS. So he "owns" a number of newsgroups. That makes a lot of sense, doesn't
it Mr. MVP?

--
Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4...nceMonitor.jpg

California 5150 Notice:

All attempts to try and convince Frank to seek help for his mental
problems have failed. The State of California has no option left but
to issue the following 5150 order within the next 24 hours.
http://tinyurl.com/y2y66g


"John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:773448EF-F12A-470A-8788-29FA41824CCB@microsoft.com...
Well said, Richard!

--
--
John Barnett MVP
Associate Expert
Windows - Shell/User

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..

"Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:utHZeSmZIHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least
> 12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you saying
> that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all
> bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.
> What say you?
>
> Richard

I say yes.
One of the unwritten rules of Usenet is to trim posts so you don't
have to read everything that went on before. You'd have just enough
of the previous thread to know what was going on without having
followed the thread from the beginning. If a person wants to get to
the end right away, there's always Ctrl-End. Look how many replies
there are in this thread but only the relevant part is in my contribution.

Tom Lake

I could care less if folks top post or bottom post,
this argument is so old, antiquated and outdated
I find it hard to believe folks still go on about it.

John, I do find you to be a helpful MVP and you've
been in this group a long time like I have.
However, I do find your sig quite obnoxiously long.
15 lines is just too much.

Since I find your postings generally have value,
blocking you is not an option. I do wish you'd
shorten your sig, though.


-Michael

"John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:773448EF-F12A-470A-8788-29FA41824CCB@microsoft.com...
> Well said, Richard!
>
> --
> --
> John Barnett MVP
> Associate Expert
> Windows - Shell/User
>
> Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
> Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org
>
> The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any kind, either
> expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy, reliability or content of this
> mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental or
> consequential damages arising out of the use of, or inability to use, information or opinions
> expressed in this mail/post..
>
> "Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:%23SZjOkaZIHA.3652@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Why? Top posting is easier and faster when reading replies in a thread. No
>> having to scroll down to the bottom to read a reply. I've never understood
>> why anyone would bottom post. I own some newsgroups and everyone
>> has always top posted their replies. It's the common sense natural way to do
>> it, and it would never even occur to anyone on our groups to bottom post a
>> reply. Sometimes the threads can get quite long and it would be a huge waste
>> of time if we had to scroll down to read the next reply in each message if
>> people bottom posted their replies. It would be crazy to use bottom posting
>> with a thread that might have replies a dozen levels deep. With top posting
>> you can read the thread and follow the conversation quickly and easily. I'm
>> wondering...do you group your messages by conversation? I use OE in XP and
>> Windows Mail in Vista as newsreaders and have always grouped messages by
>> conversation.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>> "john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9A366DD825877jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.n et...
>> I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop the
>> top posting, bottom post please.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Richard Eagle wrote:

> In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least
> 12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you saying
> that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all
> bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.
> What say you?
>
I say that those who top post on Usenet are fscking idiots with no concern
for others. I've already spelled out that REAL newsreaders drop everything
after a sig line. This means that a top post reply essentially ends up
replying to nothing. Down the road, when a computer user is seeking an
answer to a problem and looks into an Usenet archive, such as the ones
Google offers, they will find senseless drivel because of the top posters.
You should be aware that at times messages on one server don't make it out
to other servers, so the idea that thread continuity is always there, just
isn't correct.

Usenet has been around a long long time now (way before the web) and has
established proper ways of doing things. Top posting is NOT one the proper
ways to post on Usenet. If you can't understand this, then you're either
dumb or worse, you're totally inconsiderate and picking up the bad habits
of most of the MVPs around here.

Cheers.

> Richard
>
>
> "NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:fo31kt11j5h@news2.newsguy.com...
>
> Except he hasn't got a clue about what he's saying. No wonder you'd
> appreciate it. BTW, your top posting results in this ...
>
> Cheers.
>
> PS. So he "owns" a number of newsgroups. That makes a lot of sense,
> doesn't it Mr. MVP?
>

--
Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4...nceMonitor.jpg

California 5150 Notice:

All attempts to try and convince Frank to seek help for his mental
problems have failed. The State of California has no option left but
to issue the following 5150 order within the next 24 hours.
http://tinyurl.com/y2y66g

"Yes, I am a troll" ... Frank's friend AlexB (Frankie Boy, let him know
when visiting hours are at the institution.)

Trim posts? I would just as soon have anyone replying to me leave the text
of my previous replies in a post intact and unchanged, and similarly, I know
that I don't want to alter anyone else's replies by editing them to trim the
post. How do you determine what to delete and what to leave when you trim a
post to leave "just enough of the previous thread to know what was going on
without having followed the thread from the beginning"? This trimming
obviously takes time and is totally unnecessary with top posting.

Anyway, I don't think that any minds have been changed by this thread so
I guess people will just have to continue to agree to disagree about top
posting vs bottom posting.

Regards,
Richard


"Tom Lake" <toml_12953********.com> wrote in message
news:E76D2120-7A36-440A-BE89-3A85BBB94EC2@microsoft.com...

I say yes.
One of the unwritten rules of Usenet is to trim posts so you don't
have to read everything that went on before. You'd have just enough
of the previous thread to know what was going on without having
followed the thread from the beginning. If a person wants to get to
the end right away, there's always Ctrl-End. Look how many replies
there are in this thread but only the relevant part is in my contribution.

Tom Lake


"Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:utHZeSmZIHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least
> 12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you saying
> that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all
> bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.
> What say you?
>
> Richard

Since this is a Microsoft newsgroup on a Microsoft server, it seems to me
that using OE and/or Windows Mail for my newsreader should be fine. Like
many people, I don't use usenet and don't have a REAL newsreader as you
describe. If the MVPs want to post an FAQ telling us to bottom post only and
how to trim replies, etc. to comply with usenet then that would be fine, but
as long as many of them top post then that's good enough for me as well.

As for your reference to the MVPs: "picking up the bad habits of most of the
MVPs around here", I can only say for myself that I know that they are
volunteers and I really appreciate their time and efforts on this group.
They have been helpful to me in the past.

I'm curious...a quick 'find' of replies by nostop shows that you post a lot
here and much of it appears to be pro-Linux / anti-Microsoft or just plain
silly and not very useful for those seeking answers to questions related to
Vista. Do your bottom posted replies end up in the usenet archives? Looks to
me like a lot of it could be considered as the "senseless drivel" that you
are concerned about.

Richard


"NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:fo4l3301po9@news5.newsguy.com...
Richard Eagle wrote:

> In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least
> 12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you saying
> that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all
> bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.
> What say you?
>
I say that those who top post on Usenet are fscking idiots with no concern
for others. I've already spelled out that REAL newsreaders drop everything
after a sig line. This means that a top post reply essentially ends up
replying to nothing. Down the road, when a computer user is seeking an
answer to a problem and looks into an Usenet archive, such as the ones
Google offers, they will find senseless drivel because of the top posters.
You should be aware that at times messages on one server don't make it out
to other servers, so the idea that thread continuity is always there, just
isn't correct.

Usenet has been around a long long time now (way before the web) and has
established proper ways of doing things. Top posting is NOT one the proper
ways to post on Usenet. If you can't understand this, then you're either
dumb or worse, you're totally inconsiderate and picking up the bad habits
of most of the MVPs around here.

Cheers.

> Richard
>
>
> "NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:fo31kt11j5h@news2.newsguy.com...
>
> Except he hasn't got a clue about what he's saying. No wonder you'd
> appreciate it. BTW, your top posting results in this ...
>
> Cheers.
>
> PS. So he "owns" a number of newsgroups. That makes a lot of sense,
> doesn't it Mr. MVP?
>

--
Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4...nceMonitor.jpg

California 5150 Notice:

All attempts to try and convince Frank to seek help for his mental
problems have failed. The State of California has no option left but
to issue the following 5150 order within the next 24 hours.
http://tinyurl.com/y2y66g

"Yes, I am a troll" ... Frank's friend AlexB (Frankie Boy, let him know
when visiting hours are at the institution.)

Michael, it appears that nonstop is the de-facto, definitive, expert,
authority on UseNet, so to change my signature I would have to ask him/her
first for permission:-)

This subject is 'old hat' and will continue on and on ad infinitum. People
read posts quickly and, in most cases. reply to them just as quickly. The
main bone of contention is not whether one top posts or bottom posts, it's
the bit in the middle. We all can't leisurely scroll through previous
responses in a post prior to adding our own. If I did that every day I'd
hardly get anything else done. The newsgroups should be a source of
information, not a full time job - well not for me, anyway. The amount of
posts I read that start off okay and then end up in slanging matches is
beyond belief. From many of the posts I often wonder whether the newsgroups
are populated by spoilt children rather than civilised, intelligent adults.
Maybe we should start a campaign for compulsory top posting?

As for the signature that, like me, has been around a long time; however, I
will take a look at it to see if it can be cut back some.

--
--
John Barnett MVP
Associate Expert
Windows - Shell/User

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..

"MICHAEL" <u158627_7@dslr.net> wrote in message
news:Ow8KeRnZIHA.6140@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I could care less if folks top post or bottom post,
> this argument is so old, antiquated and outdated
> I find it hard to believe folks still go on about it.
>
> John, I do find you to be a helpful MVP and you've
> been in this group a long time like I have.
> However, I do find your sig quite obnoxiously long.
> 15 lines is just too much.
>
> Since I find your postings generally have value,
> blocking you is not an option. I do wish you'd
> shorten your sig, though.
>
>
> -Michael
>
> "John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:773448EF-F12A-470A-8788-29FA41824CCB@microsoft.com...
>> Well said, Richard!
>>
>> --
>> --
>> John Barnett MVP
>> Associate Expert
>> Windows - Shell/User
>>
>> Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
>> Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org
>>
>> The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
>> kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
>> reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable
>> for any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out
>> of the use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in
>> this mail/post..
>>
>> "Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23SZjOkaZIHA.3652@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> Why? Top posting is easier and faster when reading replies in a thread.
>>> No
>>> having to scroll down to the bottom to read a reply. I've never
>>> understood
>>> why anyone would bottom post. I own some newsgroups and everyone
>>> has always top posted their replies. It's the common sense natural way
>>> to do
>>> it, and it would never even occur to anyone on our groups to bottom post
>>> a
>>> reply. Sometimes the threads can get quite long and it would be a huge
>>> waste
>>> of time if we had to scroll down to read the next reply in each message
>>> if
>>> people bottom posted their replies. It would be crazy to use bottom
>>> posting
>>> with a thread that might have replies a dozen levels deep. With top
>>> posting
>>> you can read the thread and follow the conversation quickly and easily.
>>> I'm
>>> wondering...do you group your messages by conversation? I use OE in XP
>>> and
>>> Windows Mail in Vista as newsreaders and have always grouped messages by
>>> conversation.
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>> "john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9A366DD825877jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.n et...
>>> I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would stop
>>> the
>>> top posting, bottom post please.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

Richard Eagle wrote:

> Since this is a Microsoft newsgroup on a Microsoft server, it seems to me
> that using OE and/or Windows Mail for my newsreader should be fine. Like
> many people, I don't use usenet and don't have a REAL newsreader as you
> describe.

Most users here post via Usenet as do all the MVPs as far as I've noticed.

> If the MVPs want to post an FAQ telling us to bottom post only
> and how to trim replies, etc. to comply with usenet then that would be
> fine, but as long as many of them top post then that's good enough for me
> as well.
>
That's because they're fscking idiots and prefer to set their
own "standards" when it comes to Usenet. On most newsgroups, they'd be
laughed out of the place with their top posting.


> As for your reference to the MVPs: "picking up the bad habits of most of
> the MVPs around here", I can only say for myself that I know that they are
> volunteers and I really appreciate their time and efforts on this group.
> They have been helpful to me in the past.
>
If the MVPs around here have been helpful to you, it can only indicate that
you're more clueless then they are, which is hard to believe.

> I'm curious...a quick 'find' of replies by nostop shows that you post a
> lot here and much of it appears to be pro-Linux / anti-Microsoft or just
> plain silly and not very useful for those seeking answers to questions
> related to Vista. Do your bottom posted replies end up in the usenet
> archives?

Every post here ends up in the archives.

> Looks to me like a lot of it could be considered as the
> "senseless drivel" that you are concerned about.
>
Yes, I agree. Most of what comes from these so-called MVPs is senseless
drivel. If you're going to depend on these characters for your Vista
support, you're in for a very rough time.

> Richard
>

Cheers.

>
> "NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:fo4l3301po9@news5.newsguy.com...
> Richard Eagle wrote:
>
>> In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least
>> 12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you saying
>> that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all
>> bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.
>> What say you?
>>
> I say that those who top post on Usenet are fscking idiots with no concern
> for others. I've already spelled out that REAL newsreaders drop everything
> after a sig line. This means that a top post reply essentially ends up
> replying to nothing. Down the road, when a computer user is seeking an
> answer to a problem and looks into an Usenet archive, such as the ones
> Google offers, they will find senseless drivel because of the top posters.
> You should be aware that at times messages on one server don't make it out
> to other servers, so the idea that thread continuity is always there, just
> isn't correct.
>
> Usenet has been around a long long time now (way before the web) and has
> established proper ways of doing things. Top posting is NOT one the proper
> ways to post on Usenet. If you can't understand this, then you're either
> dumb or worse, you're totally inconsiderate and picking up the bad habits
> of most of the MVPs around here.
>
> Cheers.
>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>> "NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:fo31kt11j5h@news2.newsguy.com...
>>
>> Except he hasn't got a clue about what he's saying. No wonder you'd
>> appreciate it. BTW, your top posting results in this ...
>>
>> Cheers.
>>
>> PS. So he "owns" a number of newsgroups. That makes a lot of sense,
>> doesn't it Mr. MVP?
>>
>

--
Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):
http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4...nceMonitor.jpg

California 5150 Notice:

All attempts to try and convince Frank to seek help for his mental
problems have failed. The State of California has no option left but
to issue the following 5150 order within the next 24 hours.
http://tinyurl.com/y2y66g

"Yes, I am a troll" ... Frank's friend AlexB (Frankie Boy, let him know
when visiting hours are at the institution.)

We 'do not' set our own standards as you put it and, although the MVPs are
volunteers many of them are professional IT people and experts in their
field so they 'do not' spout senseless drivel. The only senseless drivel we
have seen so far is from you NoStop or is that the idea behind your
signature 'once you've started you can't stop' For God sake grow up!


--
John Barnett MVP
Computer Journalist
Associate Expert

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post.

"NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:fo4uup025nj@news5.newsguy.com...
> Richard Eagle wrote:
>
>> Since this is a Microsoft newsgroup on a Microsoft server, it seems to me
>> that using OE and/or Windows Mail for my newsreader should be fine. Like
>> many people, I don't use usenet and don't have a REAL newsreader as you
>> describe.
>
> Most users here post via Usenet as do all the MVPs as far as I've noticed.
>
>> If the MVPs want to post an FAQ telling us to bottom post only
>> and how to trim replies, etc. to comply with usenet then that would be
>> fine, but as long as many of them top post then that's good enough for me
>> as well.
>>
> That's because they're fscking idiots and prefer to set their
> own "standards" when it comes to Usenet. On most newsgroups, they'd be
> laughed out of the place with their top posting.
>
>
>> As for your reference to the MVPs: "picking up the bad habits of most of
>> the MVPs around here", I can only say for myself that I know that they
>> are
>> volunteers and I really appreciate their time and efforts on this group.
>> They have been helpful to me in the past.
>>
> If the MVPs around here have been helpful to you, it can only indicate
> that
> you're more clueless then they are, which is hard to believe.
>
>> I'm curious...a quick 'find' of replies by nostop shows that you post a
>> lot here and much of it appears to be pro-Linux / anti-Microsoft or just
>> plain silly and not very useful for those seeking answers to questions
>> related to Vista. Do your bottom posted replies end up in the usenet
>> archives?
>
> Every post here ends up in the archives.
>
>> Looks to me like a lot of it could be considered as the
>> "senseless drivel" that you are concerned about.
>>
> Yes, I agree. Most of what comes from these so-called MVPs is senseless
> drivel. If you're going to depend on these characters for your Vista
> support, you're in for a very rough time.
>
>> Richard
>>
>
> Cheers.
>
>>
>> "NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:fo4l3301po9@news5.newsguy.com...
>> Richard Eagle wrote:
>>
>>> In one thread on one of our groups we had 434 replies and some at least
>>> 12 levels deep, and all replies were of course top posted. Are you
>>> saying
>>> that it would have been easier to follow/read that thread if we had all
>>> bottom posted our replies? It's a simple yes or no question. I say no.
>>> What say you?
>>>
>> I say that those who top post on Usenet are fscking idiots with no
>> concern
>> for others. I've already spelled out that REAL newsreaders drop
>> everything
>> after a sig line. This means that a top post reply essentially ends up
>> replying to nothing. Down the road, when a computer user is seeking an
>> answer to a problem and looks into an Usenet archive, such as the ones
>> Google offers, they will find senseless drivel because of the top
>> posters.
>> You should be aware that at times messages on one server don't make it
>> out
>> to other servers, so the idea that thread continuity is always there,
>> just
>> isn't correct.
>>
>> Usenet has been around a long long time now (way before the web) and has
>> established proper ways of doing things. Top posting is NOT one the
>> proper
>> ways to post on Usenet. If you can't understand this, then you're either
>> dumb or worse, you're totally inconsiderate and picking up the bad habits
>> of most of the MVPs around here.
>>
>> Cheers.
>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>> "NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:fo31kt11j5h@news2.newsguy.com...
>>>
>>> Except he hasn't got a clue about what he's saying. No wonder you'd
>>> appreciate it. BTW, your top posting results in this ...
>>>
>>> Cheers.
>>>
>>> PS. So he "owns" a number of newsgroups. That makes a lot of sense,
>>> doesn't it Mr. MVP?
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Frank's Brain Activity Plotted (watch the red line):
> http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4...nceMonitor.jpg
>
> California 5150 Notice:
>
> All attempts to try and convince Frank to seek help for his mental
> problems have failed. The State of California has no option left but
> to issue the following 5150 order within the next 24 hours.
> http://tinyurl.com/y2y66g
>
> "Yes, I am a troll" ... Frank's friend AlexB (Frankie Boy, let him know
> when visiting hours are at the institution.)

MICHAEL wrote:
> I could care less if folks top post or bottom post,
> this argument is so old, antiquated and outdated
> I find it hard to believe folks still go on about it.
>
> John, I do find you to be a helpful MVP and you've
> been in this group a long time like I have.
> However, I do find your sig quite obnoxiously long.
> 15 lines is just too much.
>
> Since I find your postings generally have value,
> blocking you is not an option. I do wish you'd
> shorten your sig, though.
>
>
> -Michael

Let me then apologize for having an obnoxiously long sig. :)

>
> "John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:773448EF-F12A-470A-8788-29FA41824CCB@microsoft.com...
>> Well said, Richard!
>>
>> --
>> --
>> John Barnett MVP
>> Associate Expert
>> Windows - Shell/User
>>
>> Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
>> Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org
>>
>> The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of
>> any kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the
>> accuracy, reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall
>> not be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential
>> damages arising out of the use of, or inability to use, information or
>> opinions expressed in this mail/post..
>>
>> "Richard Eagle" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23SZjOkaZIHA.3652@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> Why? Top posting is easier and faster when reading replies in a
>>> thread. No
>>> having to scroll down to the bottom to read a reply. I've never
>>> understood
>>> why anyone would bottom post. I own some newsgroups and everyone
>>> has always top posted their replies. It's the common sense natural
>>> way to do
>>> it, and it would never even occur to anyone on our groups to bottom
>>> post a
>>> reply. Sometimes the threads can get quite long and it would be a
>>> huge waste
>>> of time if we had to scroll down to read the next reply in each
>>> message if
>>> people bottom posted their replies. It would be crazy to use bottom
>>> posting
>>> with a thread that might have replies a dozen levels deep. With top
>>> posting
>>> you can read the thread and follow the conversation quickly and
>>> easily. I'm
>>> wondering...do you group your messages by conversation? I use OE in
>>> XP and
>>> Windows Mail in Vista as newsreaders and have always grouped messages by
>>> conversation.
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>> "john sumner" <js33441NOSPAM@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9A366DD825877jp33441aolcom@news.albasani.n et...
>>> I am not a net cop, but i wish the people in this news group would
>>> stop the
>>> top posting, bottom post please.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group -
Submit your nomination at the link below:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

View nominations already submitted:
http://htmlgear.tripod.com/guest/con...dom&i=1&a=view

"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the
creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer
rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
- Maura Corbett

"The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'" <none@none.not> wrote
in message news:fo5jjd$uul$1@aioe.org...
> MICHAEL wrote:
>> I could care less if folks top post or bottom post,
>> this argument is so old, antiquated and outdated
>> I find it hard to believe folks still go on about it.
>>
>> John, I do find you to be a helpful MVP and you've
>> been in this group a long time like I have.
>> However, I do find your sig quite obnoxiously long.
>> 15 lines is just too much.
>>
>> Since I find your postings generally have value,
>> blocking you is not an option. I do wish you'd
>> shorten your sig, though.
>
> Let me then apologize for having an obnoxiously long sig. :)

I may not like it, but I do enjoy reading your posts. ;-)



-Michael