–
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q. Why is top posting bad?
As seen in Simos Xenitellis email, for instance, here.
–
Resp. Porque isso quebra a sequencia lógica da discussão
Perg. Por que responder no topo dos emails é ruim?
Visto num email do Simos Xenitellis, por exemplo, aqui.
English
7 comments ↓
It should be called Jeopardy posting.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
FSK6: Der Held ist ein Mädchen.
FSK12: Der Held kriegt das Mädchen.
FSK16: Der Schurke kriegt das Mädchen.
FSK18: Jeder kriegt das Mädchen.
FSK6: The Hero is a Girl
FSK12: The Hero gets the Girl
FSK16: The Bad-guy gets the Girl
FSK18: Everyone gets the Girl
i like this signature from xxxxxxxxxxxxx Forum
We must remember most people don’t see any problem in reading or writing top-post replies. Or at least so do I think, because Gmail and (I believe) Outlook use top-posting by default.
For short, focused quotes, I do prefer “bottom-posting”. But to reply to a whole email, specially a long one, and if you write one or more complete sentences instead of “OK”, then maybe it’s better to just trust the user will remember the subject by… reading the subject.
They suit different situations. For a simple reply (particularly if the original was long), top-posting sensibly places the new content at the top where it will be read. The downside is that the context needs to be clear from the reply, without scrolling down to previous parts of the conversation…
In contrast, replying with inline responses makes much more sense if replying to individual points in the original email – it keeps things in context. But it’s also quite unreadable if people quote the entirety of a long message, only to address one or two points…
But it’s also quite unreadable if people quote the entirety of a long message.
It’s also quite unreadable if people quote for this.
Leave a Comment