Why do people detest top posting so much?

[Christopher A. Williams]

On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 15:45 +0000, Odzangba K. Dake wrote:
> On Monday 23 February 2009 13:54:05 Karl F. Larsen wrote:
> > Odzangba K. Dake wrote:
> > > Ok, I just have to ask... what is so wrong with it. I admit that I
> prefer
> > > bottom posting because, well, it makes reading easier but quite a
> few
> > > people on this list (and on others) actively detest it and quite
> often
> > > snap at you if you bottom post. What's the deal here?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Odzangba
> >
> > I have seen no-one even comment on bottom replies. That is what your
> > asked to do. It is the top posters that get asked to do bottom
> posting.

Here's an excellent summary from another list by Frank Cox on the
rational of top vs. bottom posting. Perhaps this will help clarify the
"why" behind all of this:

        Top posting is generally used in direct business or personal
        correspondence. I send you a message, you put your reply on top
        of that and send it back to me. The theory is that you and I
        already know what we're talking about.
        
        In newsgroup and mailing list postings, on the other hand, the
        convention is to put your reply at the bottom or in-line with
        the original message, and the original message is ideally
        trimmed to the minimum required to keep the flow of the
        "conversation" going. The idea here is that posts are intended
        to be read and comprehended by people other than the ones who
        are directly involved in the exchange. Accordingly, it makes the
        most sense to create a message that can be read from the top to
        the bottom  in chronological order.

Cheers,

Chris

--
==============================
"If you are calm while all around you is chaos,
then you probably haven't fully understood
the magnitude of the situation."

--Unknown