[Bell Historians] Re: Netiquette

[Carl Scott Zimmerman]

On Tue, 14 Sep 2010, John Harrison wrote, "It isn't just above or 
below that matters, but cutting out what isn't needed as well."

I'd say that's *far* more important than whether to reply above or 
below the quoted material.

Having subscribed to many different mail lists during the entire 
history of email, sometimes in digest mode and sometimes in 
single-message mode, I can see only one minor advantage to bottom 
posting.  It is that people who have the habit of bottom posting seem 
to be more likely to edit out the useless stuff at the end of the 
message to which they are replying.

However, assuming that a reply is properly edited for relevancy, I 
see no practical difference between top posting and bottom posting in 
digest mode.  Either way, you have to scroll past relevant quoted 
material to get to the next segment of new material.

In individual-message mode, it seems to me that top-posting is more 
readable for short replies to long messages, while bottom-posting is 
more readable for long replies to short messages.  Regardless, when 
replying to a reply one should follow the style initially established.

On the subject of digest mode, I see only one possible advantage to 
it on a list which, like this one, inserts the list identification 
into every subject line.  If you have a "live" inbox (i.e., with 
instant notification of each incoming message - very common in work 
environments) then digest mode may reduce the number of interruptions 
which you suffer for non-work-related messages.

Carl