[139578] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Top-posting (was: Barracuda Networks is at it again: Any
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael DeMan)
Tue Apr 12 03:11:19 2011
From: Michael DeMan <nanog@deman.com>
In-Reply-To: <EMEW3|4e6c2085e55a47e07b0847bd788d0111n3B7nJ03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|E3663461-0154-43FC-9458-BA0EC9ACCBF5@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 00:08:56 -0700
To: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I really don't think anybody is concerned about how fast the email =
downloads anymore.
Rather it is more of a matter of how long it takes us humans to process =
the incredible volume of information we are expected to process.
I have no problem either 'top posting' or 'bottom posting' - but I agree =
it would be good for the NaNog list to decide on a policy.
I say we all vote.
The ultimate question on email etiquette is naturally how to properly =
identify inline commentary.
Top-post is definitely the most efficient for that. For instance, if I =
have a lengthy correspondence with a peer who may or may not speed =
English, the top-post is always respected, and from there it is quite =
easy (because it is in the top) to note that other commentary is inline =
- and (as I mentioned before) - to remove unnecessary material while =
leaving short portions of material relevant.
To get back on topic about using email efficiently and get away from =
peoples personal preferences, I will say the following.
#1) I have no disagreement about whether to top-post or bottom-post on =
this list or any other - given that there is a policy in place. =
Maintaing communications is the most important thing.
#2) I still do not understand how 'bottom posters' reference material =
from prior e-mails in their replies? Perhaps I am just ignorant. I =
often have lengthy business and technical communications which some =
times require a bit of snipping here and there - the best way to notify =
somebody you have <SNIPPED> the prior conversation is to say it right up =
front?
#3) These kinds of things become even more important when working with =
non-native English speakers.
#4) I still seem to believe (maybe I am wrong) - that 'bottom posters' =
thing that an individual email to list is supposed to be an 'archive' - =
I wholly disagree.
On Apr 11, 2011, at 11:49 PM, Tim Chown wrote:
>=20
> On 12 Apr 2011, at 07:33, Michael DeMan wrote:
>=20
>> Call me and old 'hard case' - but I prefer that when I get =
information via email, that if possible, the relevant information show =
up immediately.
>>=20
>> Call me lazy I guess - but I would expect that most folks on this =
list have also understood good user interface design, and that the least =
amount of work that needs to be done for the receiver to be able to get =
their information is frequently the best solution.
>=20
> Well indeed, top-posting is just so much more efficient given the =
volumes of email most of us probably see each day. =20
>=20
> Back when receiving an email was an event, and your xbiff flag popping =
up was a cause for excitement, taking time to scroll/page down to the =
new bottom-posted content in the reply was part of the enjoyment of the =
whole 'You have new mail' process. But I'm afraid times have =
changed; bottom-posted email is now an annoyance to most just as a =
slow-loading web page would be.
>=20
> Tim
