Posted by Kay on June 20, 2005, 12:20 pm
An increasing number of people are posting replies to threads without
any indication of what it is that they're replying to, other than the
heading which may or may not be informative.
Like many (most?) people, I'm reading this newsgroup using software that
takes me straight from one new post to the next. There's an awful lot of
posts in this newsgroup, and when someone simply follows up a previous
post with no indication of what it's about, it's a hassle to have to
start backtracking to find the post being responded to, or, worse still,
try and find a post in a separate thread with the same name.
Please could people quote enough of the post they're replying to so that
readers know what it is they're talking about? It would make reading
posts a lot easier, and it would also mean that there's a better chance
of getting a reply.
--
Kay
"Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"
Posted by Mike on June 20, 2005, 12:52 pm
That is where top posting comes to the fore :-)))
National Service (RAF) Ass. Cosford 24 - 27 June Spitfire Fly Past
H.M.S.Impregnable Ass. Sussex 1 - 4 July Visit to Int. Fest of the Sea
RAF Regiment Assoc. Scarborough 2 - 5 Sept. Visit to Eden Camp
H.M.S.Collingwood Assn Trafalgar Dinner. Coventry October 21 - 24
> An increasing number of people are posting replies to threads without
> any indication of what it is that they're replying to, other than the
> heading which may or may not be informative.
> Like many (most?) people, I'm reading this newsgroup using software that
> takes me straight from one new post to the next. There's an awful lot of
> posts in this newsgroup, and when someone simply follows up a previous
> post with no indication of what it's about, it's a hassle to have to
> start backtracking to find the post being responded to, or, worse still,
> try and find a post in a separate thread with the same name.
> Please could people quote enough of the post they're replying to so that
> readers know what it is they're talking about? It would make reading
> posts a lot easier, and it would also mean that there's a better chance
> of getting a reply.
> --
> Kay
> "Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"
Posted by Jaques d'Alltrades on June 20, 2005, 2:31 pm
> That is where top posting comes to the fore :-)))
If nothing's being quoted it's rather difficult find a choice.
--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/
Posted by Kay on June 20, 2005, 4:10 pm
>> That is where top posting comes to the fore :-)))
>If nothing's being quoted it's rather difficult find a choice.
Or to put it another way, if you aren't quoting anything, you can't top
post because there's nothing you can put your post on top of.
--
Kay
"Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"
Posted by Pam Moore on June 20, 2005, 3:21 pm
wrote:
>An increasing number of people are posting replies to threads without
>any indication of what it is that they're replying to, other than the
>heading which may or may not be informative.
>Like many (most?) people, I'm reading this newsgroup using software that
>takes me straight from one new post to the next. There's an awful lot of
>posts in this newsgroup, and when someone simply follows up a previous
>post with no indication of what it's about, it's a hassle to have to
>start backtracking to find the post being responded to, or, worse still,
>try and find a post in a separate thread with the same name.
>Please could people quote enough of the post they're replying to so that
>readers know what it is they're talking about? It would make reading
>posts a lot easier, and it would also mean that there's a better chance
>of getting a reply.
Kay. are you saying that your newsreader just puts one post after
another irrespective of subject, so they are all jumbled together?
Agent, which I use, is very well organised. The posts are
automatically grouped under the subject line. I've never used another
newsreader so don't know how the rest work. I find no trouble and have
said before that it is a pain to scroll through long posts which build
up with each subsequent post, and then I find at the bottom "I agree
with you" or other one line additions. It's better when people snip as
much as possible. This is where top posting makes life easier. But I
know I'm in a minority here and don't top post any more!
Pam in Bristol
XML site map
> any indication of what it is that they're replying to, other than the
> heading which may or may not be informative.
> Like many (most?) people, I'm reading this newsgroup using software that
> takes me straight from one new post to the next. There's an awful lot of
> posts in this newsgroup, and when someone simply follows up a previous
> post with no indication of what it's about, it's a hassle to have to
> start backtracking to find the post being responded to, or, worse still,
> try and find a post in a separate thread with the same name.
> Please could people quote enough of the post they're replying to so that
> readers know what it is they're talking about? It would make reading
> posts a lot easier, and it would also mean that there's a better chance
> of getting a reply.
> --
> Kay
> "Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"