[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4388AE1C.4040805@randomvoids.com>
Date: Sat Nov 26 18:49:10 2005
From: kyle at randomvoids.com (Kyle Lutze)
Subject: Return of the Phrack High Council
yeah, that was a slight accident, the first one I composed only went to
him since I didn't hit reply-all, and didn't fully edit the second one. :/
ok, so I'm a bit of a hypocrite sometimes too. Also, I didn't mean to
say wikipedia's definition was a way to go, I was just using that to
show my reason without having to put it all in
Kyle
Mike Klein wrote:
> And yet you quoted netdev's entire email for no good reason
> whatsoever...another breach of supposed netiquette.
>
> Top vs. bottom posting is a bunch of crap. With 20 years experience in
> computing I have yet to see consensus on this issue....regardless of
> wikipedia definition.
>
> I subscribe to numerous mail lists/etc. and far prefer top posts...less
> scrolling to bottom too see what is being said. If people snipped orig
> post than bottom posting would <possibly> be preferrable...but quite
> often this isn't the case...and very often extremely verbose crap like
> images/etc. (dammit' mom get with the program) is often left in as well.
>
> mike klein
>
> Kyle Lutze wrote:
>
>> now, can't you post correctly in a mailing list?
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/top_posting I mean come on, a computer
>> guru not knowing about that?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists