Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
User Journal

Chacham's Journal: Email: top-post/ Newsgroup: Bottom-post 4

Journal by Chacham

To my knowledge, proper email etiquette is to top-post. Proper newsgroup etiquette is to bottom-post. And that seems to be folowed by mostly everyone.

Then I started qorking with SQL-server, and find that most people in the SQL-Server newsgroups, top post. Why? It makes it so much harder to follow.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Email: top-post/ Newsgroup: Bottom-post

Comments Filter:
  • I'm assuming you're referring to typing your response ahead of the responded-to message, as opposed to after it.

    I think that it became the preferred method in email because most of the people emailing don't really know any better. They just hit "reply" and start typing, and that's where they end up.

    It also only really makes sense to bottom post when you are responding in context to specific arguments made in the original. Otherwise the inclusion of the original at all is basically just a reminder of wha

    • Exactly.

      I think you got it correctly. Email is a conversation, so the earlier messages are only reference, if needed, and as such can be relegated to the bottom.

      A news posting, however, is for a much wider audience, and is useually more techincal, as such the earlier posts provide a bit more than just a reminder.

      And, I don't think anyone made up these rules, they just naturally came about.

      I wonder...
  • If you are talking about Microsoft SQL Server, maybe it's because all Microsoft-branded products capable of reading newsgroups (Outlook, Outlook Express) default to top-posted replies, while most standalone newsreaders default the other way around.

    Personally, I use interpolated replies whenever possible for both mediums.

    ~GoRK
  • Whether we're talking newsgroups, email, quoting letters, or any other sort of information exchange, I never want to see more than a maximum of 1-2 lines of reference material before getting to what the current speaker/author has to say. I'm already familiar with the earlier material -- heck, I probably just finished going through the earlier stuff -- and now I want to get to the point.

    Unless you're family, I probably won't bother to read your email/newgroup reply if the first page is all quotes from prev

"Why should we subsidize intellectual curiosity?" -Ronald Reagan

Working...