I just think this is old-guard new-guard.  I don't want to pick on you,
Michael, but I need to use your message as an example of why I don't
like bottom posting.  (I love ya' man.  Go Eagles!) 

With bottom-posted responses, I'm forced to scroll through a bunch of
stuff I've already read (and am not going to read again) to find with my
eyes where the carats stop.  If I was reading through a blackberry or
something like that, what gets downloaded by default will be the
worthless carated lines, and I'll have to hit <more all> to get the
rest, and wait while it downloads.

I'm back to this: It's a personal choice and I like top posting better
-- except for detailed discussions where I have to respond to multiple
posts.  Even then, I trim everything except just the text I'm responding
to so that people don't have to scan/download a bunch of text to see
what I'm saying.

This topic is WAY off topic for this list.  I suggest we just end it
here and agree to disagree.  Let's talk instead on whether the NetWorker
server should run on Unix or Windows. <KIDDING!>

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

-----Original Message-----
From: EMC NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU] On
Behalf Of MIchael Leone
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 6:28 AM
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [Networker] Top-posting and quoting

EMC NetWorker discussion <NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU> wrote on 
01/28/2008 06:57:44 PM:

> Tim Mooney wrote:
> 
> > Call me elitist if you wish, but I would place more weight on the 
opinions
> > of the people that answer the preponderance of the questions.  The 
term
> > you once used for those people was "NetWorker List Superstars".
> 
> As someone who has posted a few times on this list in the past, I will

> weigh in with my opinion. Personally I detest top posting. I think a 
> readable reply to a discussion should take the form of one or more 
> responses to points made by the poster whose message you are replying 
> to. All the rest of the chaff should be disposed of.
> 
> However - this really depends on the tools available. Most decent mail

> clients make in-line replies quite simple, by automatically quoting
the 
> previous message. This includes sophisticated quality mail clients
such 
> as Thunderbird and many others, and also some old text based
favourites 
> such as elm, pine, and good old mailx.
> 
> There is one abomination of a proprietary mail client which makes 
> in-line posting extremely difficult, and virtually forces the user to 
> top-post. 

You must mean a Blackberry, because when I used Outlook, I used to 
bottom-post all the time. It's not hard, nor impossible - just a couple
of 
extra steps. I even do it on the current abomination of a mail client I 
currently use (Notes).

> Unfortunately this particular mail client is widely used due 
> to it being  about the only client compatible with a widely used 
> proprietary backend mail server, 

I did used to use Thunderbird IMAP client with Exchange, to read and
send 
email. You can't do scheduling with anything except Outlook, but we're
not 
talking about scheduling.

I can live with top posting. Not trimming, or not quoting back
*anything*, 
is highly aggravating.

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this 
list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER