weren't all talking about C64s??? ":) 2015-12-10 3:23 GMT-02:00 <d...@661.org>:
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2015, Mike Stein wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Fred Cisin" <ci...@xenosoft.com> >> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" < >> cctalk@classiccmp.org> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 10:05 PM >> Subject: Re: TOP POSTING (was: RE: Best 200 buck I have ever spent!!! >> Deal of a lifetime!!! >> >> >> "Top posting implies that you are only interested in computers from the >>>> 1990s or newer." >>>> >>> >>> On Wed, 9 Dec 2015, drlegendre . wrote: >>> >>>> In addition to being a sign of secretly harbored communist sympathies. >>>> >>> >>> I thought that it was the other way around >>> >> >> You mean as in "there's only one way to do something (the Party Line/the >> way it's always been done), regardless of how most of the rest of the world >> does it, and anyone deviating from that will be publicly >> chastised/criticised (unless they seem to rate an exemption for some >> reason)?" >> >> Personally, I find bottom-posting a huge PITA, both sending and >> receiving, although trimming and inline posting certainly have their place. >> > > Top-posting is like taking a crap in your pants because that's where your > arse was when you needed to go. > > > -- > David Griffith > d...@661.org > > A: Because it fouls 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 in e-mail? >
