Posted by meow2222 on March 13, 2006, 3:04 am
Bob Eager wrote:
I find it hard to see why anyone would get worked up about it. Both
methods work fine, as do some others, and in the real world there will
always be people that choose a and people that choose b. And of course
people that need to get over it. The day you tell everyone they must
post your way is the day you need to get real.*
* generic you, not any one in particular.
Posted by Solar Flare on March 13, 2006, 3:11 am
Posted by raden on March 11, 2006, 6:41 pm
Waste of time talking to you then
If you can't understand the difference between replying to an email
where the recipient knows what you're talking about and wants to access
your reply quickly and a thread in a newsgroup where there is a natural
progression where one needs to follow hot the thread develops
Posted by Guy King on March 10, 2006, 8:00 am
Thing is - I've no idea to what you're referring unless I first read the
bottom of the page - which is counter to how most people read English.
Because it goes counter to the flow of how English is read.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
Posted by PopS on March 10, 2006, 2:10 pm
Personal opinion, and counter to what most responses to this will
If I'm answering an easy question, I top post because the OP
knows what he's already asked and he's prime. IF others have
been following the thread, they also know what's been said or,
sometimes might have to dip down to see the original question,
but it's no big deal for me, shouldn't be for them.
If it's more comples, I post inline and trim contectually.
If it's an ongoing discussion I bottom post because it's easiest
to go back thru a long post to read it chronologically.
Most of the silly where-post talk, including my own message here,
is just to waste time when it's available and to quiver a liver
here and there for those who make too much out of it.
sometimes I do both. <g>.