top or bottom

On Sep 18, 8:21 am, "Boca Jan" wrote:
An issue with me is there are a few folks that use the "New Post" button
instead of the "Reply Group" button. Not an issue really (although the post
doesn't show up as a respond to the original message) except there is no
original post to link it to.

Since I use Outlook Express to see RCTQ, my posts are all in outline form. I
can also flag the original message if it is something I want to follow and
it appears at the top of the posts until I take away the flag.

Soooooo simple.

--
Boca Jan
Florida - Land of the Hurricanes
boca_jan1atyahoodotcomhttp://community.webshots.com/user/BocaJan

"Gen" wrote in message

...



I know we've had this discussion numerous times, but since there are a lot
of newbies, I thought I'd open it up again. There are some that answer
posts by posting on top and others that wait and post at the bottom of
previous posts. Personally, I prefer posting on top, leaving enough of the
post being answered to tell what the answer is referring to. If posting on
the bottom, some are leaving everything in---often many prior posts. This
means scrolling ALL the way down to see the answer, which is occ. "me too".
Very frustrating. If posting on the bottom of previous messages, please
eliminate some of the earlier ones. Thanks

--
Gen
http://community.webshots.com/user/Coren920- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

i guess since i'm a "newbie" to this group, and use the office
broadband....(ahem...dont tell the boss!) i dont really care if the
reply is top or bottom posted. i prefer bottom, because the flow of
conversation is easier to follow, but i think it's a personal choice.
i have dial-up at home, and it's frustrating after being spoiled at
work!
amy

As someone who's used to doing it on the bottom so far on here,
I'll try doing it on the top.

Being computer lingo challenged and a highly dorky geek, what was all
that you wrote Jeanne? You lost me when you said OE.

As a newbie and a HDG I do find some of the posts hard to follow and
don't manage to get to read half of them before my brain pegs out.

I am amazed though how you all seem to manage to keep up with the
majority of posts. I could spend an entire day just trying to keep
track and still get lost. I forget whose who when a user name is
shown on the top and a proper name at the bottom... It would be
easier if it were the other way round.

HOWEVER! All said, hells bells and buckets of blood, I do enjoy being
in this group. You can talk about anything! Elly




On Sep 17, 9:02 pm, "nzlstar*" wrote:
hells bells, i'll throw yet another spanner into the works by copy/pasting
the bottom posters to the top and then replying.
i use OE, it is set up to include the whole msg when i reply.
the problem is it puts "replyers name" wrote... at the top for the last
poster and
if they reply at the bottom, the post they are replying to is in the middle,
therefore under the "replyers name" now that is very confusing
so i move their post up to the top under "replyers name" wrote...
gawd, just read thru that and only i'll understand it. i move stuff around
from how it shows up for my reply.

i also remove all email addys and isp info that most folks leave in.
it also really bugs me all to heck when folks reply but do not sign their
name under their post anywhere at all.
i thot (my spelling version) most email readers had a way of including your
choice of signature in the reply each time automatically saves whomever
having to type it each time.
oh oh and how about not 'wrapping' the text but letting it flow waaaaaaay
out across the page ad infinitum. yikes!
hey but that is just me and how i work things out here.
the discussion will go on forever and never be resolved to everyones
satisfaction but i'm willing to add my two centavos just for fun.
cheers,
jeanne

"L" wrote...
Heh, probably not the newbies who do it.... it is a long standing
practice, a usenet 'tradition' so to speak. And, folks have 'good' reasons
for each method.

It all works out to a matter of preference.

Since it can become quite difficult to follow a 'thread' - especially when
there are replies to replies - I personally prefer a BOTTOM post, so that
I can see just what the person who posted was answering or referring to.
If the quotes are numerous, as can happen when two or more folks are
replying to each other, then cutting out some of the conversation - with
an indication that things were 'snipped', can make it easier to follow.

IMO, top posting often means that I have the 'reply' before the original
post - especially as I am prone to browsing some ng's less frequently than
others. Depending on your IP and news reader, a post more than a couple
days old might not even be shown, meaning you would need to use Google or
some other web reader to find the original thread that the 'reply' refers
to.

You got me thinking, though. And so I googled a bit and found some
opposing opinions.

For those of you who embrace top posting
://www.hawkwings.net/2005/10/03/shooting-yourself-in-the-foot-or-head-on...

And, from Wikipedia, this interesting set of questions, for use as a
signature
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 in e-mail?
"Gen" wrote...
I know we've had this discussion numerous times, but since there are a lot
of newbies, I thought I'd open it up again. There are some that answer
posts by posting on top and others that wait and post at the bottom of
previous posts. Personally, I prefer posting on top, leaving enough of
the post being answered to tell what the answer is referring to. If
posting on
the bottom, some are leaving everything in---often many prior posts.
This means scrolling ALL the way down to see the answer, which is occ. "me
too". Very frustrating. If posting on the bottom of previous messages,
please eliminate some of the earlier ones. Thanks

Just being a devil ; )

On Sep 17, 9:02 pm, "nzlstar*" wrote:

i also remove all email addys and isp info that most folks leave in.

I haven't figured out how to add them yet Jeanne let alone remove
them

it also really bugs me all to heck when folks reply but do not sign their
name under their post anywhere at all.

I'd prefer Jeanne at the top instead of nzlstar

i thot (my spelling version) most email readers had a way of including your
choice of signature in the reply each time automatically saves whomever
having to type it each time.

You what?

oh oh and how about not 'wrapping' the text but letting it flow waaaaaaay
out across the page ad infinitum. yikes!

You can wrap text on here?

hey but that is just me and how i work things out here.
the discussion will go on forever and never be resolved to everyones
satisfaction but i'm willing to add my two centavos just for fun.

Ditto and Me too Jeanne )))

cheers,

Elly PS You aren't by any chance from the North East of England?

Hi Boca Jan,
I too have Outlook Express and I'm interested in how you view your
posts. I've been clicking on the tops I want to read and then get
straight to the web page. If I scroll down to the actual posts I get
confused as to what's been said so I end up having to go to the RCTQ
group pages anyway.
I didn't realize you could reply straight from the email.

How do you flag a topic? Hope I'm making sense (though that would be
a miracle)

Elly ps hope I've trimmed my dog ears properly!

"Boca Jan" wrote:
An issue with me is there are a few folks that use the "New Post" button
instead of the "Reply Group" button. Not an issue really (although the post
doesn't show up as a respond to the original message) except there is no
original post to link it to.

Since I use Outlook Express to see RCTQ, my posts are all in outline form. I
can also flag the original message if it is something I want to follow and
it appears at the top of the posts until I take away the flag.

Soooooo simple.

On Sep 18, 11:49 am, Elly wrote:
Hi Boca Jan,
I too have Outlook Express and I'm interested in how you view your
posts. I've been clicking on the tops I want to read and then get
straight to the web page. If I scroll down to the actual posts I get
confused as to what's been said so I end up having to go to the RCTQ
group pages anyway.
I didn't realize you could reply straight from the email.

How do you flag a topic? Hope I'm making sense (though that would be
a miracle)

Elly ps hope I've trimmed my dog ears properly!

"Boca Jan" wrote:



An issue with me is there are a few folks that use the "New Post" button
instead of the "Reply Group" button. Not an issue really (although the post
doesn't show up as a respond to the original message) except there is no
original post to link it to.

Since I use Outlook Express to see RCTQ, my posts are all in outline form. I
can also flag the original message if it is something I want to follow and
it appears at the top of the posts until I take away the flag.

Soooooo simple.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

on Google you can "star" the topic that way you can find it quicker.
amy

Thank you.
Gen

"Elly" wrote in message
ups.com...
As someone who's used to doing it on the bottom so far on here,
I'll try doing it on the top.

Being computer lingo challenged and a highly dorky geek, what was all
that you wrote Jeanne? You lost me when you said OE.

As a newbie and a HDG I do find some of the posts hard to follow and
don't manage to get to read half of them before my brain pegs out.

I am amazed though how you all seem to manage to keep up with the
majority of posts. I could spend an entire day just trying to keep
track and still get lost. I forget whose who when a user name is
shown on the top and a proper name at the bottom... It would be
easier if it were the other way round.

HOWEVER! All said, hells bells and buckets of blood, I do enjoy being
in this group. You can talk about anything! Elly




On Sep 17, 9:02 pm, "nzlstar*" wrote:
hells bells, i'll throw yet another spanner into the works by
copy/pasting
the bottom posters to the top and then replying.
i use OE, it is set up to include the whole msg when i reply.
the problem is it puts "replyers name" wrote... at the top for the last
poster and
if they reply at the bottom, the post they are replying to is in the
middle,
therefore under the "replyers name" now that is very confusing
so i move their post up to the top under "replyers name" wrote...
gawd, just read thru that and only i'll understand it. i move stuff
around
from how it shows up for my reply.

i also remove all email addys and isp info that most folks leave in.
it also really bugs me all to heck when folks reply but do not sign their
name under their post anywhere at all.
i thot (my spelling version) most email readers had a way of including
your
choice of signature in the reply each time automatically saves whomever
having to type it each time.
oh oh and how about not 'wrapping' the text but letting it flow waaaaaaay
out across the page ad infinitum. yikes!
hey but that is just me and how i work things out here.
the discussion will go on forever and never be resolved to everyones
satisfaction but i'm willing to add my two centavos just for fun.
cheers,
jeanne

"L" wrote...
Heh, probably not the newbies who do it.... it is a long standing
practice, a usenet 'tradition' so to speak. And, folks have 'good'
reasons
for each method.

It all works out to a matter of preference.

Since it can become quite difficult to follow a 'thread' - especially
when
there are replies to replies - I personally prefer a BOTTOM post, so
that
I can see just what the person who posted was answering or referring
to.
If the quotes are numerous, as can happen when two or more folks are
replying to each other, then cutting out some of the conversation -
with
an indication that things were 'snipped', can make it easier to follow.

IMO, top posting often means that I have the 'reply' before the
original
post - especially as I am prone to browsing some ng's less frequently
than
others. Depending on your IP and news reader, a post more than a couple
days old might not even be shown, meaning you would need to use Google
or
some other web reader to find the original thread that the 'reply'
refers
to.

You got me thinking, though. And so I googled a bit and found some
opposing opinions.

For those of you who embrace top posting
://www.hawkwings.net/2005/10/03/shooting-yourself-in-the-foot-or-head-on...

And, from Wikipedia, this interesting set of questions, for use as a
signature
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 in e-mail?
"Gen" wrote...
I know we've had this discussion numerous times, but since there are a
lot
of newbies, I thought I'd open it up again. There are some that answer
posts by posting on top and others that wait and post at the bottom of
previous posts. Personally, I prefer posting on top, leaving enough of
the post being answered to tell what the answer is referring to. If
posting on
the bottom, some are leaving everything in---often many prior posts.
This means scrolling ALL the way down to see the answer, which is occ.
"me
too". Very frustrating. If posting on the bottom of previous messages,
please eliminate some of the earlier ones. Thanks

Howdy!

I like you up here at the top, Elly. ;-D

How to keep up w/ the posts: after a while you learn to skip over
the ones you're pretty sure won't hold your attention
(I don't do much appliqué, no machine quilting, don't care
anything about the directory [dozens of posts about that,
saves me hours to just mouse over those]).
If you do miss something you'll probably pick it up later in
someone else's post(s) and you can go back into the archives
to see "what the heck are they talking about?!"

And it's really a time saver to open a note, see the latest reply
at the top, and decide in that instant to stay & read or fly on
to the next subject. ;-D

R/Sandy-- living dangerously: skipping posts & admitting it ;-P


On 9/18/07 10:05 AM, in article
, "Elly"
wrote:

As someone who's used to doing it on the bottom so far on here,
I'll try doing it on the top.

Being computer lingo challenged and a highly dorky geek, what was all
that you wrote Jeanne? You lost me when you said OE.

As a newbie and a HDG I do find some of the posts hard to follow and
don't manage to get to read half of them before my brain pegs out.

I am amazed though how you all seem to manage to keep up with the
majority of posts. I could spend an entire day just trying to keep
track and still get lost. I forget whose who when a user name is
shown on the top and a proper name at the bottom... It would be
easier if it were the other way round.

HOWEVER! All said, hells bells and buckets of blood, I do enjoy being
in this group. You can talk about anything! Elly




On Sep 17, 9:02 pm, "nzlstar*" wrote:
hells bells, i'll throw yet another spanner into the works by copy/pasting
the bottom posters to the top and then replying.
i use OE, it is set up to include the whole msg when i reply.
the problem is it puts "replyers name" wrote... at the top for the last
poster and
if they reply at the bottom, the post they are replying to is in the middle,
therefore under the "replyers name" now that is very confusing
so i move their post up to the top under "replyers name" wrote...
gawd, just read thru that and only i'll understand it. i move stuff around
from how it shows up for my reply.

i also remove all email addys and isp info that most folks leave in.
it also really bugs me all to heck when folks reply but do not sign their
name under their post anywhere at all.
i thot (my spelling version) most email readers had a way of including your
choice of signature in the reply each time automatically saves whomever
having to type it each time.
oh oh and how about not 'wrapping' the text but letting it flow waaaaaaay
out across the page ad infinitum. yikes!
hey but that is just me and how i work things out here.
the discussion will go on forever and never be resolved to everyones
satisfaction but i'm willing to add my two centavos just for fun.
cheers,
jeanne

"L" wrote...
Heh, probably not the newbies who do it.... it is a long standing
practice, a usenet 'tradition' so to speak. And, folks have 'good' reasons
for each method.

It all works out to a matter of preference.

Since it can become quite difficult to follow a 'thread' - especially when
there are replies to replies - I personally prefer a BOTTOM post, so that
I can see just what the person who posted was answering or referring to.
If the quotes are numerous, as can happen when two or more folks are
replying to each other, then cutting out some of the conversation - with
an indication that things were 'snipped', can make it easier to follow.

IMO, top posting often means that I have the 'reply' before the original
post - especially as I am prone to browsing some ng's less frequently than
others. Depending on your IP and news reader, a post more than a couple
days old might not even be shown, meaning you would need to use Google or
some other web reader to find the original thread that the 'reply' refers
to.

You got me thinking, though. And so I googled a bit and found some
opposing opinions.

For those of you who embrace top posting
://www.hawkwings.net/2005/10/03/shooting-yourself-in-the-foot-or-head-on...

And, from Wikipedia, this interesting set of questions, for use as a
signature
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 in e-mail?
"Gen" wrote...
I know we've had this discussion numerous times, but since there are a lot
of newbies, I thought I'd open it up again. There are some that answer
posts by posting on top and others that wait and post at the bottom of
previous posts. Personally, I prefer posting on top, leaving enough of
the post being answered to tell what the answer is referring to. If
posting on
the bottom, some are leaving everything in---often many prior posts.
This means scrolling ALL the way down to see the answer, which is occ. "me
too". Very frustrating. If posting on the bottom of previous messages,
please eliminate some of the earlier ones. Thanks

rofl, Elly.
nope i live in New Zealand, hence my nickname nzlstar*
the star is cuz at the time i came online i was working with a freelance
astronomer.
we'd go to schools and school camps with telescopes and binoculars and we
did a 'view the nightsky' evening.
it was fun and so using star as part of my nickname seemed logical at the
time, still does with all the stars in quilting.
i like the nzl part so folks will know where i am now. (born in california
but as of now have spent half my life in calif and half in nz).

you said you read the ng (newsgroup) in OE (outlook express).
you can reply from there by hitting the 'reply group' button at the top.
if that is not there you can to fix your layout as you please.
holler if you need help with that, eh.
more reply'n is interspersed, now aint that annoying from me, lol.

"Elly" wrote...
Just being a devil ; )
it suits you, lol.

"nzlstar*" wrote:
i also remove all email addys and isp info that most folks leave in.

I haven't figured out how to add them yet Jeanne let alone remove
them
in Outlook Express (OE) they are included in the reply automatically, so i
remove them.

it also really bugs me all to heck when folks reply but do not sign their
name under their post anywhere at all.
I'd prefer Jeanne at the top instead of nzlstar
i understand but there is more than one Jeanne, only one nzlstar*

i thot (my spelling version) most email readers had a way of including
your
choice of signature in the reply each time automatically saves whomever
having to type it each time.
You what?
in OE you can include automatically, in any mail or ng post/reply, whatever
info you want at the bottom of your post as your 'signature'.
things like your name, you webshots link, other links, special quotes,
whatever you fancy really.

oh oh and how about not 'wrapping' the text but letting it flow waaaaaaay
out across the page ad infinitum. yikes!
You can wrap text on here?
yup, you can set it to wrap at whatever length you fancy or none at all if
that suits but that is soooooooo annoying.

hey but that is just me and how i work things out here.
the discussion will go on forever and never be resolved to everyones
satisfaction but i'm willing to add my two centavos just for fun.

Ditto and Me too Jeanne )))

cheers,

Elly PS You aren't by any chance from the North East of England?
hmmmm, i wonder why you ask that?
cheers,
jeanne

Thank you Sandy I feel so much better ,
I could have cut a quilt out in the time it's taken me to 'trim' this
post ))lol.
Unlike fabric though if you trim too much (as I did the first attempt,
you can cancel and start again)

Elly

Sandy Ellison wrote:
Howdy!

I like you up here at the top, Elly. ;-D

How to keep up w/ the posts: after a while you learn to skip over
the ones you're pretty sure won't hold your attention
(I don't do much appliqué, no machine quilting, don't care
anything about the directory [dozens of posts about that,
saves me hours to just mouse over those]).
If you do miss something you'll probably pick it up later in
someone else's post(s) and you can go back into the archives
to see "what the heck are they talking about?!"

And it's really a time saver to open a note, see the latest reply
at the top, and decide in that instant to stay & read or fly on
to the next subject. ;-D

R/Sandy-- living dangerously: skipping posts & admitting it ;-P

oh oh and how about not 'wrapping' the text but letting it flow waaaaaaay
out across the page ad infinitum. yikes!

You can wrap text on here?

it's much more about what you do, than what the group does, there isn't
a central location that stores messages in a consistent format, whatever
it looks like from your end, you're sending a message that has extra
information with it, some of it essential for getting it to the right
place and others telling the reader how it should look, then it's a
combination of how your reader works and how you choose to have it set
up that makes it appear a particular way.

Cheers
Anne