X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f996b,c7651e2a193030d0 X-Google-Attributes: gidf996b,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-12-29 21:47:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!syros.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!feed.news.nacamar.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!h62n2fls34o1115.telia.COM!not-for-mail From: Veronica Karlsson Newsgroups: alt.ascii-art Subject: Re: [CAAN] Request for Hierarchical Category List Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 05:54:08 +0000 Lines: 56 Message-ID: <3E0FDF80.4173EF7C@hotbrev.com> References: <3e0cbfc6$0$35803$edfadb0f@dread15.news.tele.dk> <3e0e4eaf$0$26166$626a54ce@news.free.fr> <3e0faac6$0$17186$626a54ce@news.free.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: h62n2fls34o1115.telia.com (213.64.199.62) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1041227222 9289554 213.64.199.62 (16 [58193]) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04 (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i586) Xref: archiver1.google.com alt.ascii-art:21282 BoD wrote: > Tom Bampton wrote: > > "BoD" wrote : > > > Some unknown person whose name got snipped wrote: > > > > > > > > Please don't top post. > > > > > > Why not ??? > > > > Because it makes it harder to read the message. It reverses the > > natural flow of conversation, requiring you to read the end before > > the beginning. > > You don't want to read the beginning (you already have read it in the > previous message in the thread). How can you be so sure about that? * There are different ways to sort messages. * Some people prefer not to "thread" the messages (e.g. they read in chronological order, or favourite authors first, or ...) * Sometimes a message doesn't reach your server (or is removed from the server, or they can be in response to somebody you killfiled, ...). * Servers get full and dump old messages. Sometime I only have access to 2-3 days' worth of messages in some groups. If I go away for a week the beginning of a thread may not be available to me. * etc etc etc > But you want to include it because it may be of importance as reference > material. But less important than the new content, thus behind it. When you reply to bits of posts (like I do now) top posting can really mess up the context. Replies in chronological order don't suffer from that problem. You can't know how people will reply to your message. > Anyway, I guess this conversation has already taken place many times, in > many other places. My point is: don't tell people how they should format > their text because this is really a question of taste, and subjective, and > there is no "best" way. There is the traditional way (clue: classics become classics for a reason). -- ##### c ^ OO /\\\\ ##### | /|\ `^^^^^^^%-- '||` | \\\\ ####-[.]\ / \ " " \ ha ha ha dd /[.]-\\\| ### _| |_ \\| ### (_ http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/cgi/asciichat/ _)} == \ / A S C I I A R T C H A T # ||\