A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Making a copy of a DVD



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old February 25th 12, 07:12 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Robert Sudbury
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

You've just provided an argument against `snipping'. You've just taken a
portion of a conversation out of context. By doing so you illegitimately
attempt to validate your own opinion.

By removing the line that precedes what you've quoted:

"What I'm attempting to convey in my comment:"

.... you've corrupted the conversation to your own ends by making it appear
that I've just either bottom-posted or replied in-line; causing me to appear
as a hypocrite.

The section your are referring to should properly read, and I quote:

"What I'm attempting to convey in my comment:

Top posting is where I'm at, and will stay at. Chances are, when you
opened
this letter, you recognized that the reply was `right here' ... three
seconds and you found your goal. Life is good. 8)


.... is that when you opened your reader program, when you selected this
message to read, what did you see first? ..."

If usenet content was friendlier towards quoting, indentation and other
formating tools, I could have made a more elaborate quoting implementation,
however, it is also obvious that once you read the mis-quoted element in
context, the portion of text you have deliberately edited is meant as quoted
content.

"Steve Hayes" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:17:43 -0500, "Robert Sudbury" noEMAILforYOU
wrote:

Top posting is where I'm at, and will stay at. Chances are, when you
opened
this letter, you recognized that the reply was `right here' ... three
seconds and you found your goal. Life is good. 8)


... is that when you opened your reader program, when you selected this
message to read, what did you see first? This. This text. This
top-posted
reply. This effort took all of three seconds for you to recognize. No
other effort, no matter how small, was required by you to process my
reply.
No mousing, no scrolling. Chances are very good that you grew up in a
culture that reads top to bottom. And where is my reply text right now?


In some strange places, it seems.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop
uk

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 6915 (20120225) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com




--
[Robert]


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6915 (20120225) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com



Ads
  #32  
Old February 25th 12, 07:24 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 08:52:56 -0500, Stan Brown
wrote:


Your argument is essentially that you want to put your stuff in the
wrong position because you can't be bothered to do the editing. In
other words, your time is more important than that of thousands of
readers. I don't think so.

And it's not like the editing is that hard to do.



Here's my view (basically similar to yours).

Bottom posting is bad because you have to scroll down (sometimes way
down) to get to the reply.

Top posting is even worse because you first have to scroll down to
find what is being replied to, and then back up to read the reply.

But if you do a good job of editing the text in the message you're
replying to, it hardly matters whether you bottom post or top post. If
both your reply and what you are replying to can fit on the screen,
top or bottom doesn't matter much.

But if you are replying to several different points, then as far as
I'm concerned, inline posting, with the reply to each post following
what is being replied to, is necessary. Anything else muddies the
waters terribly.
  #33  
Old February 25th 12, 07:59 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Gene E. Bloch[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,720
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On 2/25/2012, Robert Sudbury posted:
Despite your apparent lack of conversation skills, I still scrolled through
to the bottom of your reply to read your one-line insult.


I respect your choice to bottom post, but I suggest you try to articulate
yourself in a less demeaning manner.


As for your argument pro or con, I see none.


:-)

Robert, I suggest you don't bother with this argument any more. No one
will change their minds, some insults will be traded, and often, it
will still be necessary to scroll to the bottom of a long series of
replies to learn that the poster forgot to type his contribution, or
that he did remember but *should* have forgotten :-)

"Erik Vastmasd" wrote in message
...


SNIP

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)


  #34  
Old February 25th 12, 08:41 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Robert Sudbury
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

I was awaiting one last reply to close out my arguments.

I honestly sat myself down and put some thought into my position on posting
style. I'm not averse to change, but I see no compelling reason to change
at this time.

Before this NG is polluted further by off-topic shenanigans, I will leave
this thread with these parting thoughts.

My initial reason for hijacking this thread was to defend another poster's
right to post in the style of their choice. I think I've defended his/her
right, established my opinion and generated some mostly civil discourse.

My opinion is that posting style is subject to context and choice.

In the context of this un-moderated newsgroup, that is neither relevant to
nor implies connection to life-saving medical or scientific research, legal
consul, private, corporate, governing or theological official discussion,
the choice of posting style is entirely up to the poster, and no one way is
right or wrong. We all have our personal reasons for choosing a particular
style and that is all the reason one needs.

Finally, further to my re-thinking of my personal choice for posting style,
I realized that I came to my conclusion a very long time ago. For most
people these days who still participate in usenet newgroups, technology
often plays a major role in our lives and lifestyles. As such, we are more
aware of technological change than most. Technology by its very nature is
all about change; so I thought.

Since I last pondered my reasons, what has changed that could possible sway
me away from my choice? One particular thought reinforced my opinion.

With the advent of cell phone technology, WiFi and the proliferation of
handheld devices, especially tablets and smart phones with their small
displays, if I must read newsgroups through any one of a number of mobile,
wireless devices, which posting style would I prefer to be faced with?

"Gene E. Bloch" wrote in message
...
On 2/25/2012, Robert Sudbury posted:
Despite your apparent lack of conversation skills, I still scrolled
through to the bottom of your reply to read your one-line insult.


I respect your choice to bottom post, but I suggest you try to articulate
yourself in a less demeaning manner.


As for your argument pro or con, I see none.


:-)

Robert, I suggest you don't bother with this argument any more. No one
will change their minds, some insults will be traded, and often, it will
still be necessary to scroll to the bottom of a long series of replies to
learn that the poster forgot to type his contribution, or that he did
remember but *should* have forgotten :-)

"Erik Vastmasd" wrote in message
...


SNIP

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 6915 (20120225) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com




--
[Robert]


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6915 (20120225) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com



  #35  
Old February 25th 12, 09:40 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:17:43 -0500, "Robert Sudbury" noEMAILforYOU
wrote:

What I'm attempting to convey in my comment:

Top posting is where I'm at, and will stay at. Chances are, when you
opened
this letter, you recognized that the reply was `right here' ... three
seconds and you found your goal. Life is good. 8)


... is that when you opened your reader program, when you selected this
message to read, what did you see first? This. This text. This top-posted
reply. This effort took all of three seconds for you to recognize. No
other effort, no matter how small, was required by you to process my reply.
No mousing, no scrolling. Chances are very good that you grew up in a
culture that reads top to bottom. And where is my reply text right now?


No mousing, no scrolling? You're completely overlooking the fact that
I had to scroll down to see who and what you were replying to, then
scroll back up to read your reply. If I had skipped the scrolling and
simply started reading your reply, I wouldn't have had any context.

So while you apparently think you're doing your readers a favor,
you're actually doing the opposite.

--

Char Jackson
  #36  
Old February 25th 12, 09:45 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:40:27 -0500, "Robert Sudbury" noEMAILforYOU
wrote:

Quite the opposite. I consider all time valuable.


WHAT is quite the opposite? Opposite of what? (Hang on while I scroll
down to see who and what you're replying to.) Ok, I'm back. Thanks for
making me scroll down and back up in order to make sense of your post.

I've just saved you three seconds by not bottom posting.


Hmm, but you cost me a lot more time than that by making me scroll
down and back up. What is it you're trying to accomplish, exactly? Are
you quite sure this isn't just a case of being too lazy to place your
comments where they make contextual sense?

Be honest now, when you opened or first viewed this message, what part of
the body of this reply did you see first?


I saw the answer first, then I scrolled down to see the question, and
finally back up to re-read the answer. Thanks, I guess.

By the way, NOD32 can be configured to stop announcing that it has
checked your post prior to submission. We don't really need to see
that.

--

Char Jackson
  #37  
Old February 25th 12, 09:48 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 13:12:25 -0500, "Robert Sudbury" noEMAILforYOU
wrote:

You've just provided an argument against `snipping'. You've just taken a
portion of a conversation out of context. By doing so you illegitimately
attempt to validate your own opinion.


I did??! Oh wait, let me scroll down to see to whom you're directing
those comments. Oh, ok, Steve Hayes. Thanks for making me scroll down
and back up again. You could have saved me, and everyone else, the
effort, you know, just by placing your reply properly.

--

Char Jackson
  #38  
Old February 25th 12, 10:24 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Stan Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,904
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:04:43 -0500, "Robert Sudbury" wrote:
Top-posting is inclusive; it doesn't exclude or frustrate those users not


"Exclude" is a chimera.

And your upside-down posting *does* frustrate many of us.

Fortunately, there are killfiles.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...
  #39  
Old February 25th 12, 11:04 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
sticks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On 2/25/2012 2:40 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:17:43 -0500, "Robert Sudbury"noEMAILforYOU
wrote:

What I'm attempting to convey in my comment:

Top posting is where I'm at, and will stay at. Chances are, when you
opened
this letter, you recognized that the reply was `right here' ... three
seconds and you found your goal. Life is good. 8)


snip

No mousing, no scrolling? You're completely overlooking the fact that
I had to scroll down to see who and what you were replying to, then
scroll back up to read your reply. If I had skipped the scrolling and
simply started reading your reply, I wouldn't have had any context.

So while you apparently think you're doing your readers a favor,
you're actually doing the opposite.


Char has hit the nail on the head. Number one reason for not top
posting is that it forces the readers to double read many things that
otherwise wouldn't be necessary.

Robert does not really understand the meaning of "bottom posting."
Evidently, he thinks it means your reply goes all the way at the bottom.
In reality, it means your words go "below" what you are responding to.
This combined with proper snipping makes a thread flow as in
conversation. Email, especially business email, is a different animal.
That smart and handheld devices currently have limitations is not a
viable reason to change accepted procedures here. They will catch up.

It is said that people who top post are one of three things: newbie,
lazy or stupid. They can be any combination, or even all three of the
above. Hopefully, they outgrow the phase and try to fit in.

I suggest there is another description: Troll. In that case, Stan has
the best option. Killfile and get it over with.

sticks



  #40  
Old February 25th 12, 11:25 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Prisca
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On 25/02/2012 22:04, sticks wrote:

It is said that people who top post are one of three things: newbie,
lazy or stupid. They can be any combination, or even all three of the
above. Hopefully, they outgrow the phase and try to fit in.


sticks


Sorry to butt in on this fascinating conversation, but I just have to
jump in here.

I agree that there are many who are either a newbie, lazy or stupid, but
not everyone who top posts falls into these categories. I think in any
group the convention that should be followed is that of the specific
group, and those wishing to post in it should abide by the majority and
learn to observe the convention before wading in. In this particular
group I would bottom post, or possibly post inline if required.

In other groups that I'm subscribed to, many of which are specifically
for the blind or for those with an interest in blind technology, the
convention is for top posting because it takes time for screen readers
or braille readers to read through all the previous post to get to the
latest response. Electronic speech is quite time consuming at the best
of times, given that it tends to read all the headers and other garbage
which a sighted reader would automatically filter out or skim through.

In all cases though, the main thing for both top and bottom posters to
follow is the convention of proper snipping or editing posts. If I have
to wade through 20 previous posts to get to a one liner at the bottom
I've usually given up on the whole thing by then and just mark the
poster down as either lazy or too stupid to bother with.

Just my twopenneth and I will now go back to lurk mode

Regards
Prisca

--
Put the big cat out to reach me.
  #41  
Old February 26th 12, 12:15 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Robert Sudbury
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

You're right. That extra text added by my AV is rather extraneous and
unnecessarily bulks the message.

I've removed it from my settings.

Thank you for pointing that out.

"Char Jackson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:40:27 -0500, "Robert Sudbury" noEMAILforYOU
wrote:

Quite the opposite. I consider all time valuable.


WHAT is quite the opposite? Opposite of what? (Hang on while I scroll
down to see who and what you're replying to.) Ok, I'm back. Thanks for
making me scroll down and back up in order to make sense of your post.

I've just saved you three seconds by not bottom posting.


Hmm, but you cost me a lot more time than that by making me scroll
down and back up. What is it you're trying to accomplish, exactly? Are
you quite sure this isn't just a case of being too lazy to place your
comments where they make contextual sense?

Be honest now, when you opened or first viewed this message, what part of
the body of this reply did you see first?


I saw the answer first, then I scrolled down to see the question, and
finally back up to re-read the answer. Thanks, I guess.

By the way, NOD32 can be configured to stop announcing that it has
checked your post prior to submission. We don't really need to see
that.

--

Char Jackson



--
[Robert]

  #42  
Old February 26th 12, 01:46 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Zaidy036[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 427
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On 2/25/2012 3:45 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:40:27 -0500, "Robert Sudbury"noEMAILforYOU
wrote:

Quite the opposite. I consider all time valuable.


WHAT is quite the opposite? Opposite of what? (Hang on while I scroll
down to see who and what you're replying to.) Ok, I'm back. Thanks for
making me scroll down and back up in order to make sense of your post.

I've just saved you three seconds by not bottom posting.


Hmm, but you cost me a lot more time than that by making me scroll
down and back up. What is it you're trying to accomplish, exactly? Are
you quite sure this isn't just a case of being too lazy to place your
comments where they make contextual sense?

Be honest now, when you opened or first viewed this message, what part of
the body of this reply did you see first?


I saw the answer first, then I scrolled down to see the question, and
finally back up to re-read the answer. Thanks, I guess.

By the way, NOD32 can be configured to stop announcing that it has
checked your post prior to submission. We don't really need to see
that.


Why scroll when ctrl+end and ctrl+home are instantainious?

--
Zaidy036
  #43  
Old February 26th 12, 02:01 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,318
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 19:46:32 -0500, Zaidy036
wrote:

On 2/25/2012 3:45 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:40:27 -0500, "Robert Sudbury"noEMAILforYOU
wrote:

Quite the opposite. I consider all time valuable.


WHAT is quite the opposite? Opposite of what? (Hang on while I scroll
down to see who and what you're replying to.) Ok, I'm back. Thanks for
making me scroll down and back up in order to make sense of your post.

I've just saved you three seconds by not bottom posting.


Hmm, but you cost me a lot more time than that by making me scroll
down and back up. What is it you're trying to accomplish, exactly? Are
you quite sure this isn't just a case of being too lazy to place your
comments where they make contextual sense?

Be honest now, when you opened or first viewed this message, what part of
the body of this reply did you see first?


Why scroll when ctrl+end and ctrl+home are instantainious?



Whether those choices exist for you depends on what newsreader you
use. They are *not* all the same.

And whether you can scroll quickly using such shortcuts or not, they
are still extra steps that aren't necessary if the message isn't top
posted.
  #44  
Old February 26th 12, 02:02 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Steve Hayes[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,089
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 13:12:25 -0500, "Robert Sudbury" noEMAILforYOU wrote:

... you've corrupted the conversation to your own ends by making it appear
that I've just either bottom-posted or replied in-line; causing me to appear
as a hypocrite.


No, I was just replying to your post as you saw it.

The section your are referring to should properly read, and I quote:

"What I'm attempting to convey in my comment:

Top posting is where I'm at, and will stay at. Chances are, when you
opened
this letter, you recognized that the reply was `right here' ... three
seconds and you found your goal. Life is good. 8)


... is that when you opened your reader program, when you selected this
message to read, what did you see first? ..."


What I read when I( opened my reader program was the first thing you said in
reply to something I said, except that you didn't reply to what I said, you
simply quoted something you yourself had said, making it *appear* that you
were replying, when actually you were not.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
  #45  
Old February 26th 12, 02:10 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Steve Hayes[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,089
Default USENET Posting styles (was Making a copy of a DVD)

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 16:04:06 -0600, sticks wrote:

Robert does not really understand the meaning of "bottom posting."
Evidently, he thinks it means your reply goes all the way at the bottom.
In reality, it means your words go "below" what you are responding to.


And that is precisely the advantage of e-mail and other forms of electronic
communication.

In a paper letter, if you were replying to a loetter or memo that made several
points, you would have to write introductory material to make it clear which
point you are replying to.

Electronic mail improves on this by making it possible to reply to point
seriatim.

Top oposting, however, forces one to reply as if one were subject to the
contraints of paper mail.

This combined with proper snipping makes a thread flow as in
conversation. Email, especially business email, is a different animal.


I would disagree. Even there top posting is silly, especially if one is
replying to a message that makes several points.




--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.