From owner-freebsd-newbies Thu Feb 27 5:57:38 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1812037B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 05:57:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.92]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF7CA43F75 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 05:57:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kevin@caomhin.demon.co.uk) Received: from caomhin.demon.co.uk ([62.49.21.186]) by anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18oOXW-0004aT-0Y; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:57:34 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:57:15 +0000 To: WolfRyder Cc: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org From: Kevin Golding Subject: Re: Top posting References: <5.1.0.14.2.20030226165246.00a8c770@pop.omah.uswest.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20030226165246.00a8c770@pop.omah.uswest.net> <20030227005226.GC88122@wantadilla.lemis.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20030227063629.00b24270@pop.omah.uswest.net> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20030227063629.00b24270@pop.omah.uswest.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 5.01 U Sender: owner-freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Someone, quite probably WolfRyder, once wrote: >> >> If I'm interested enough to be following a thread, I'll have read >> >> the whole original post to begin with. >> >> >And remember every detail? Sorry, I'm not that good. And I can't >> >trust the person at the other end to know what I'm thinking. >> >For reference I keep the original post. What's one email as opposed to a >bazillion? Unfortunately when dealing with high volumes that's not always practical. I still have a lot of mail kept around for reference and sometimes sorting through it can be a huge pain. Also given that this is a mailing list there can be problems with propagation, see my quote below. >Just stating my opinion. I've seen some web versions >of 'netiquette' and perhaps an authoritative one can be written. But just >like anything else in writing, people will find things that "agree with >their point of view". Back in October 1995 RFC1855, AKA FYI28, appeared. RFCs are pretty authoritative and about the closest thing the Internet has to regulations. In terms of top/bottom posting I couldn't find an explicit comment, but with a quick scan but I did find this one: - If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original! Given that traditionally people interwove their replies it's pretty easy to see the point though. It also mentions the propagation issue I mentioned above. Maybe it's just that my interpretation fits in with my view of the world. If you want to read the full document then a copy can be found at It's true that most managers etc. don't read RFCs and they've started doing things their way, but even if you top post everywhere else it's probably fair to say that a group full of people who've been online longer than most people have been using computers will be a little more traditional. You don't have to post like everyone else but you'll fit in a lot more if you do. Kevin -- kevin@caomhin.demon.co.uk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message