Copy of email to [email protected]

"bof" > wrote in message
...
<snip>
> --
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Priceless! Thanks for making me laugh at the end of my day bof.

In message >, Neil
> writes
>
>"bof" > wrote in message
...
><snip>
>> --
>> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
>> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>> A: Top-posting.
>> Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
>
>Priceless! Thanks for making me laugh at the end of my day bof.

It is isn't it, but thanks really goes to whoever I nicked it off that
made me laugh out loud at the end of my day, though they probably nicked
it off . . .

etc.

--
bof at bof dot me dot uk

Whatever. I manually delete the automatic insertion because some people
(Mozilla users all, presumably) complained they could not see what was
below.

(Also in response to bof, who has such a great sense of humour.)

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

" > wrote in message
t...
[...]
>
> I hadn't heard that, but hey.
> It's hyphen hyphen space return, to be strict.
> If you leave out the space, standards-conformant newsreaders won't
> recognise it as a sigsep
>
> --
> tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger

"Dori A Schmetterling" > wrote in message

> (Also in response to bof, who has such a great sense of humour.)

<sniff>

<sniff, sniff, sniff>

I'm still not sure if I can smell a Troll or not.
(f/u set)

On 8 Mar 2005 18:00:21 GMT, Marcus Houlden >
wrote:

>On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 10:55:35 -0500, Neil >
>wrote the following to uk.misc:
>
>
>> For everyone's benefit, there is an excellent
>> explanation of the history of top-posting and bottom-posting he
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting
>
>And a few words to describe Andy Turner he
>http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/WikiSaurus:fool
>
>He does tend to pop up when there's a row going on. He doesn't add anything;
>he just likes moaning.

Why not add him as an entry?

Cheers,
Alex.
--
http://www.munted.org.uk

Costing the net hundreds if not thousands of dollars, Dori A
Schmetterling said:
> Whatever. I manually delete the automatic insertion because some people
> (Mozilla users all, presumably) complained they could not see what was
> below.
>
Ah, you mean people who have standards-conformant newsreaders have
trouble with posts that have the sigsep near the top...
That's fixable, if it's due to using OE - there's a neat little prog
called OEQuotefix


> (Also in response to bof, who has such a great sense of humour.)
>
> DAS
>
> For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
> ---
>
> " > wrote in message
> t...
> [...]
> >
> > I hadn't heard that, but hey.
> > It's hyphen hyphen space return, to be strict.
> > If you leave out the space, standards-conformant newsreaders won't
> > recognise it as a sigsep
> >
> > --
> > tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger
>
>
>

--
tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger tiger

fbloogyudsr wrote:
> "Mary Pegg" > wrote
> > Andy Turner wrote:
> >> Self-centredness is having your head so much up your own arse that you
> >> believe that the preferences of you and others are the only
> >> preferences that must be allowed and that they must be forced on those
> >> who have different preferences.
> >
> > Nobody's forcing anybody to do anything.
> >
> > Least of all post to, or read, uk.misc. However those that choose to
> > post to uk.misc are requested to abide by the norms of the group.
>
> The problem is that *you* and the other regular posters to auk.misc
> don't own the "group". Nor do the posters to alt.autos.bmw own it.
> Nor does the US own the internet, etc. (If you want moderated
> discussion, join a moderated group.)
>
> You have to take the bad (trolls and top/bottom posting, poor clipping)
> with the good (which is *really* good): free speech and discussion.
>

All of which is sort of true. Which is precisely why I deal with people
who are too idle, ignorant or self obsessed to understand why top posting
is a mistake, by killfiling them on sight. They can post what they like
and how they like, but if they aren't prepared to format their posts so
that they effectively use the medium in a ay that is convenient for
everyone else, I simply can't be bothered with their contribution. It's a
matter of mutual respect. If people refuse to consider other people's
convenience to be at least as important as their own, then I will deal
with them in the way that is most convenient for me. Which is killfile the
silly sods.

Everyone in the UK has the right to go to Speaker's Corner and have a
jolly good rant. They DON'T have the right to complain that nobody is
listening when they do so by wearing a chicken costume and speaking only
in Esperanto. They also shouldn't complain when somebody points out that
almost nobody who can hear them speaks Esperanto and that the chicken
costume does nothing for their credibility. If they start defending those
decisions with ignorant, illogical, or self centred arguments, then they
shouldn't be surprised if they also attract a certain amount of abuse.

--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"

Dean Dark wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 12:33:21 +0000 (UTC), Andy Turner
> > wrote:
>
> >Ack, I clearly hadn't finished writing that bit.. I'll try again:
>
> Since metaphor is too subtle for you, I have concluded that the best
> course of action in this case is for you to bypass it and to literally
> plunge your head into a bucketful of **** and see if you gag. Please
> report back with your findings.
>

<applause>

I like this one. Can we keep him?

--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"

Eric Jarvis wrote:

> I like this one. Can we keep him?

IAWTP.

--
Happy, sad, cross and concentrating.

"Eric Jarvis" > wrote
> All of which is sort of true. Which is precisely why I deal with people
> who are too idle, ignorant or self obsessed to understand why top posting
> is a mistake, by killfiling them on sight. They can post what they like
> and how they like, but if they aren't prepared to format their posts so
> that they effectively use the medium in a ay that is convenient for
> everyone else, I simply can't be bothered with their contribution. It's a
> matter of mutual respect. If people refuse to consider other people's
> convenience to be at least as important as their own, then I will deal
> with them in the way that is most convenient for me. Which is killfile the
> silly sods.

So if Galileo, Descartes, Tolstoy or such began top-posting from
beyond the grave, you'd killfile them? Seems a little short-sighted
to me.

Floyd