Re: OT: Top post v. bottom post

"John Noble" <bizzdevsans_at_spampacbell.net> wrote in message news:<P3Gm9.55$jY7.5556525_at_newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>...
> "John R Pierce" <spam_at_is.invalid> wrote in message
> news:655mpu0d0dijji4p1k7mld2nmnh0lprt5m_at_news.lmi.net...
> > On Wed, 02 Oct 2002 15:18:12 GMT, "John Noble"
> > <bizzdevsans_at_spampacbell.net> wrote:
> > yeah, edit the original down to just what you are replying to, like I did
> > above.
> >
> > -jrp
>
> I guess my question is, why bother? By posting at the top, the reader can
> choose to scour the balance if interested. By posting at the top, we all
> just read the latest without apging around looking for the new stuff.
>

The problem then arises, how do you know the poster has put everything at the top until you look at it all?

> One clear advantage is it's smaller files flying about, as all that trimming
> has (hopefully) occured.
>
> (How'd I do?) ;-}

Someone should tell google to default their posting software properly.  That is, someone who they would listen to rather than the round-file contact.

jg

--
@home is bogus.
Why are so many places suddenly top-post-flaming again?