[pchelpers] Fwd: why top posting wastes more time than interleaved posting

From: "Ekhart GEORGI (last name last)" <ekhart.georgi@xxxxxxxxx>
To: pchelpers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 12:50:38 +0200
forwarding old message below to explain reader-friendly quoting


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [pchelpers] why top posting wastes more time than interleaved 
posting
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 17:37:41 +0200
From: Ekhart GEORGI (last name last) <Ekhart.GEORGI@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: pchelpers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: pchelpers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

(resending with better subject and some corrections)

Hi Susan

> Posting below the original is optional.  All email lists I'm on reply
> above the old comments, not below them, and that seems to be the
> norm.

Yes, it's become the most common way of replying because so many new
people suddenly started using email and forums in the 90s that the
oldies weren't able to teach the newbies how to do it right. I once
heard that it's an AOL disease that spread...

In addition, many companies require that customer service include the
original message untouched, which means that the answer of course has to
go above the original because it would be senseless to make the customer
first scroll through his message to see the answer.

> It saves having to scroll so far down just to read the newest
> comments. Even all the online blogs post the most recent info at the
> top.  I detest scrolling down past "old" stuff just to fine one new
> comment at the bottom.  The exception would be if you're replying to
> multiple issues, so replying after each line or paragraph then makes
> more sense.

The problem is not answers below quotes of what they're responding to
but answers anywhere (above, interleaved, and below) that quote
unnecessary parts of the original. This bad habit developed in the
nineties because the hordes of newbies never learned that it's sloppy
and rude to not trim the quoted original. So there is no difference
between bottom posting and interleaved posting if one correctly removes
all of the quoted message that is not necessary for understanding the reply.

You're right that it's annoying to have to scroll through many lines of
an old message that are not necessary for understanding a reply written
below, but even more annoying is the situation now common on this list
and elsewhere, in which the answer is above the original and 1)
incomprehensible because one doesn't know what is being replied to 2)
one has to scroll down 3) has to hunt for what is being responded to 3)
has to scroll back up and 4) has to reread the answers. That means one
has to scroll through the old message twice instead of once and has to
read the answer twice (and people still don't learn to remove the
unnecessary parts of the original that waste time and annoy).

So it's best to put your answer after quoting the few lines necessary
for understanding what you're responding to and removing those parts of
the old message that are not necessary for understanding your answer
(and removing previous messages perhaps quoted in the old message).

It is also important to have at least one empty line between
the quoted part(s) of the old message and your answer. Otherwise most
people find such interleaved answers very confusing and annoying. Many
can't even find your answers.
[pchelpers] Fwd: why top posting wastes more time than interleaved posting

Other related posts:
