IMHO and WADR I am on four different types of lists.
When I am following a thread I very much appreciate those respondents who
get their point across up front without making me wade through previous
posts which I have already read.
I can understand the concept of bottom posting as a means of easily
generating digests. However, digests don't seem to be an issue on any of the
lists to which I subscribe.
The concept of most lists should be "the free exchange of ideas in the most
efficient manner possible".
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gregory Stark" <stark@enterprisedb.com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "Andy Anderson" <aanderson@amherst.edu>; "Postgres General List"
<pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 11:30 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Bottom Posting
>
> "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>
>> Bottom line: have some respect for your readers. Make it easy to
>> distinguish what you wrote from the preceding material, and remember
>> that the only reason you are quoting anything at all is to provide some
>> context for what you are saying. We don't need to re-read the entire
>> darn thread.
>
> I don't think the people who top-post or quote the entire message are
> doing it
> out of disrespect. They just have never been exposed to the traditional
> style.
>
> The main reason I posted this was to demonstrate that there's really no
> reason
> to quote the original message. My response was only to this one point and
> not
> the longer previous point. I actually think this is a more important point
> to
> get across than simply "don't top post" which just seems to generate lots
> of
> "bottom posts" that are just as bad.
>
> --
> Gregory Stark
> EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
> Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
