From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E84K5-0002uY-7C for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2005 23:06:21 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7ON4MXT018131; Wed, 24 Aug 2005 23:04:22 GMT Received: from ms-smtp-03-eri0.texas.rr.com (ms-smtp-03.texas.rr.com [24.93.47.42]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7ON0c1d016651 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2005 23:00:39 GMT Received: from [192.168.1.100] (cpe-68-201-117-76.gt.res.rr.com [68.201.117.76]) by ms-smtp-03-eri0.texas.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with ESMTP id j7ON1gRZ006187 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:01:42 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <430CFC55.4060709@gt.rr.com> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:01:41 -0500 From: "Anthony E. Caudel" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050807) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] why gentoo doesn't have long description? References: <20050823112654.GA31003@lugmen.org.ar> <430CD9AF.4030204@pbp.net> <430CE320.8020905@gt.rr.com> <200508242145.02046.mcbrides9@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <200508242145.02046.mcbrides9@comcast.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.92.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine X-Archives-Salt: 77a4f152-c035-4bbf-8971-05610efa82e8 X-Archives-Hash: e99408c52326dc57d4cb898cc132784e Jerry McBride wrote: > On Wednesday 24 August 2005 09:14 pm, Anthony E. Caudel wrote: > >>Jonathan Nichols wrote: >> >>>Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >>> >>>>On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 11:57:09 -0300 Daniel da Veiga >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>| You know bud, read some rules, be polite. >>>> >>>>There are many who consider top posting to be just about the rudest >>>>thing you could possibly do on a mailing list. HTML email is worse, but >>>>not by much. >>> >>>It's too bad that even *gmail*, the paragon of geek email, encourages >>>top posting. :( >>> >>>And it's also the default setting in Thunderbird. I wish they'd change >>>that. >> >>As a matter of curiosity, why is top posting considered bad form. I'm >>using Thunderbird and when it views the mail, by default it is at the >>top. With bottom posting, I have to scroll down to view the post. >> > > > I with you, brother... > > > For me, top posting keeps me from having to wade through the entire message to > get to the "new response" of the OP. > > I think most "linux nerds" (me included) distain top posting because it's the > default setting of some email app that runs on the windows OS.... > > > Jerry > > > > > Yes. However, I understand Hemmann and Nebinger's points. Makes sense in a way. But I don't usually start reading at the top. I usually will have already read previous comments and I just want to get to the latest. Too bad Thunderbird doesn't have a setting "Start_Read_At_Bottom" :-) Tony -- Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list