What does "top posting" mean?

No because someone might ask if you have a four-poster at home. ;)

Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.

C.R. Krieger said the following on 11/12/06 20:58:

There is although it's called the Usenet Guidelines although propagated into various forms. After Google took over from Dejanews it's all turned to crap. When a new user joined up with a bulletin board the Usenet Guidelines were the first thing one was told to download and read.

Richard.

But what is he a poster child for?

The next step is to repeat yourself?

PS: The above is what is wrong with top posting. Did my sentence make any sense to you before you read the original message afterwards?

To complete my sins, no trimming at all, not even the sigs, and adding material at the bottom, too. If you didn't scroll down, you've missed this brilliant prose.

That's exactly what is generally preferred. Unfortunately many people don't make the effort to trim.

BobbyG

I agree. I almost always top-post - that's where my news reader automatically puts me when I reply to a thread anyway. It's really a matter of personal preference with really no more importance than a preference for Times Roman vs., Arial font when you type a letter.

If everyone top-posted there would still be that chronologic progression of the thread that someone mentioned a couple days ago. the only difference is that, as you quite accurately pointed out, it relieves the need to scroll down through stuff you've already read to get to the new post at the bottom.

Not to mention that if you use a decent reader you choose the auto option for top or bottom, as well as display by thread tree - which is what I always do if I really want to examine a discourse anyway.

So it makes me no difference - top or bottom post...variety is good.

I'm tempted to say 'responsibility'.

Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr. ;)