[wellylug] "The quart-annual top-posting debate"

[Jim Cheetham]

Andrej wrote:
> As I said: laziness on the behalf of the top poster.  He can't be
> bothered.  Not even to scroll, it would appear.

Absolutely 100% true.
Most of the mailing lists I follow are not terribly interesting - I'm
looking for that elusive 10% of Theodore Sturgeon's data
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeons_law)

So, if a confirmed non-trimming bottom poster puts something interesting
in a busy thread, because of my laziness, I'll miss it. If I had a
higher resolution, smaller fonts and better eyesight, I'd be able to see
more of a message in one go. But the problem would still remain, just be
not as obvious.

Now, as you see here, I'm replying point-by-point, and therefore I'm
posting below your comments. That works. A good top-post is a comment
that refers to the entire replied message, not to individual points.

And your sig? Reductio ad absurdum :-)


> So you're a brighter cookie than most, and with a
> tremendous memory - good on yah.  That means that
> netiquette is only for the dumber amongst us, and the
> "bright cookies" can do as they please?

Absolutely. Isn't this supposed to be a meritocracy?

-jim