Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 21:07:37 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: questions@freebsd.org Cc: Paul Schmehl <pauls@utdallas.edu> Subject: Re: top posting (off-topic) Message-ID: <20071124190736.GB3162@kobe.laptop> In-Reply-To: <D63B7027-4454-474F-AF4C-62E608D60FA5@hiwaay.net> References: <31AE442CCBC1094ABC40CE85B0149F06468CE8@MAIL1.registry.otago.ac.nz> <7FA9B777A6FFF4225817FE48@[172.16.1.36]> <D63B7027-4454-474F-AF4C-62E608D60FA5@hiwaay.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2007-11-23 21:58, David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net> wrote: >On Nov 22, 2007, at 9:10 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote: >> Understood from that perspective, perhaps you can see why people >> might dislike top posting. > > Many here (and elsewhere) will not reply to a top-poster. I am one of these people. If I see a top-posted message -- totally incomprehensible, full of errors, misformattings, and other annoying bits, including mutilated quotes with completely messed up quoting, and semi-randomly wrapped text -- then it instantly rings a very important bell: "The author of this message does not care enough to put some effort into writing a properly formatted, readable reply. If he doesn't care enough to make his message readable, do you really want to spend the effort to _read_ it?" The answer is, surprisingly often, "No, I don't think I want to do that".
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071124190736.GB3162>