Re: Top-posting (was: Barracuda Networks is at it again: Any Suggestions as to anAlternative? )

[gord <gordslater () ieee org>]

On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 00:08 -0700, Michael DeMan wrote:

Rather it is more of a matter of how long it takes us humans to process the incredible volume of information we are 
expected to process.
> I have no problem either 'top posting' or 'bottom posting' - but I agree it would be good for the NaNog list to 
> decide on a policy.
There is a policy already in place - in the NANOG General Mailing List Posting Convention. I linked to it when I first 
commented that I couldn't follow the flow about filtering ops for large-scale mail queues.

For anyone has trouble accessing the internet at http://www.nanog.org/mailinglist/listfaqs/generalfaq.php?qt=convent
here's what it says..

"Format 
When posting to the NANOG list please avoid: 
1. Top-posting, i.e., putting your reply right on top of the message you're responding to ....."

Pedants will note, before it causes yet another war, that I haven't quoted it with " > " because it is a body of text 
not a previous email contribution to the list.

Sadly, my initial observation in the thread has prompted 3 rather obnoxious off-list emails. Those ASs can now whistle 
if they expect anything from us, operationally or otherwise. Sad.

I found the thread particularly hard to follow once top-posting had started because I scan the NANOG list for 
operational issues and requests, not spamtools, so I was unfamiliar with some of the sales terms passed about, even 
though I have run BSD-based systems for several high-volume streams in a ISP environment myself.

I wasn't pedantic or impolite enough to suggest that it was off-topic here (which, technically, it is), simply saying 
that it was doing my head in (because of the top posting breaking the flow) to follow it all when I could only give it 
10 seconds (max) per post.

gord


-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.