 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / RVs / March 2006CampgroundReport.com
Hi Everyone - My brother and I just launched a new Campground and RV Park reviews site at http://www.CampgroundReport.com We would love to receive comments on the site. Plus, we are giving away a $50 Camping World gift card right now - submit a review and you are entered into the drawing. Check it out! And please forgive me if this is considered advertising. I wasn't sure when reading the posting guidelines since we are not selling anything. Steve http://www.CampgroundReport.com Unbiased Campground and RV Park Reviews > Hi Everyone - > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > http://www.CampgroundReport.com > Unbiased Campground and RV Park Reviews I think that is a good bookmark site, thanks.  SignatureBill P. just Dog & ME At this time in life all that remains is left overs, some can be cherished as good others bad, but the only definite is that they are all that remains, main course is over. I just sent you info on Brannan Island State Park in California. You have a nice site but you've sure bitten off a huge project! Good luck with your efforts. Dale www.fishwisher.com >You have a nice site but you've sure bitten off a huge project! Good >luck with your efforts. If any of you end up keeping up with this site I would be interested in how it compares, as you actually use it, with the longstanding http://rvparkreviews.com SignatureDon Bradner donb at arcatapet dot com www.arcatapet.net top post is good?? go4 >>You have a nice site but you've sure bitten off a huge project! Good >>luck with your efforts. > > If any of you end up keeping up with this site I would be interested > in how it compares, as you actually use it, with the longstanding > http://rvparkreviews.com > top post is good?? > go4 Top post, it seems, is bad in this group -- Tom J Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once. > > top post is good?? > > go4 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Some mistakes are too much fun > to only make once. Personally, I prefer top posts. I see where "Richard Bornstein" <richard.bornstein@3web.net> contributed: >Personally, I prefer top posts. By consensus, they are unwelcome here. Will Sill The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill >I see where "Richard Bornstein" <richard.bornstein@3web.net> > contributed: > >>Personally, I prefer top posts. > > By consensus, they are unwelcome here. http://www.merriamwebster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=consensus: 1 a: general agreement 2 : group solidarity in sentiment and belief Your opinion is not consensus. This is not a moderated newsgroup. There are no rules. I doubt it's possible for there to be a consensus, or for anyone to measure it. One need not be 'welcome' to contribute. While some may not like it, others might. Usually I top post. Sometimes I bottom post. Neither changes the quality of what I contribute. What an inane discussion. SignatureChris Cowles Gainesville, FL '00 Coleman Mesa/'05 Durango Hemi > Usually I top post. Sometimes I bottom post. Neither changes the quality of > what I contribute. I've read your post. You're right. Whether top or bottom posted it still ain't very good quaility! snipped > I've read your post. You're right. Whether top or bottom posted it > still ain't very good quaility! What's a "quaility"? Maybe a quail like bird? Hugh > snipped > > I've read your post. You're right. Whether top or bottom posted it > > still ain't very good quaility! > > What's a "quaility"? Maybe a quail like bird? > Hugh whats wrong with you? Can't you reaid? >> By consensus, they are unwelcome here. > http://www.merriamwebster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=consensus: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Your opinion is not consensus. Heh! That's cute. Based on my recollection of the numerous times this has been debated, the use of "consensus" in this context is correct. > This is not a moderated newsgroup. True. That is one of the reasons I prefer it to other discussion groups. > There are no rules. Bzzzzt! Wrong. Read the RFC. Easily the most egregious offense here is the tendency of some to quote WAAAAY too much. That's worse than not quoting at all. > I doubt it's possible for there to be a consensus Of course, it IS possible. > or for anyone to measure it. That would be the challenge. > One need not be 'welcome' to contribute. > While some may not like it, others might. The beauty of anarchy: If you don't like what you're reading, change the channel. > Usually I top post. We all make mistakes. > Sometimes I bottom post. We all "get it right" occasionally. > Neither changes the quality of what I contribute. Heh! In your NOT so humble opinion. > What an inane discussion. You got THAT right. Signature:\ JR The tendency to quote too much is one of the main reasons many prefer to bottom post. Proper quoting makes top or bottom work either way. No big deal. > Bzzzzt! Wrong. Read the RFC. Easily the most egregious offense here is the > tendency of some to quote WAAAAY too much. That's worse than not quoting at > all. Most thinking people do. Only the memory impaired need to re-read everything before they can reply. George >> > top post is good?? >> > go4 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >Personally, I prefer top posts. > Most thinking people do. Only the memory impaired need to re-read > everything before they can reply. > > George Top posting is considered poor netiquette all over usenet. Has been for years. Kinda like farting at the dinner table. So in essence you just farted. Please excuse yourself! jw While true I think it is bad 'net'iquette to bottom post especially for those that do not properly quote. All in all it really is not that big of a deal and certainly not one that is worth the often heated arguments that have taken place on usenet. Post where you want and it's fine. > Top posting is considered poor netiquette all over usenet. Has been for > years. Kinda like farting at the dinner table. > While true I think it is bad 'net'iquette to bottom post especially for > those that do not properly quote. All in all it really is not that big [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Top posting is considered poor netiquette all over usenet. Has been for > > years. Kinda like farting at the dinner table. Sure fart at the table too. ANd pick your nose too for all I care. I haven't got to eat with you! > Top posting is considered poor netiquette all over usenet. It's true, to the chagrin of many. > Has been for years. Since well before most of the miscreants even HAD a computer. > Kinda like farting at the dinner table. > > So in essence you just farted. Please excuse yourself! Don't hold your breath. (huh?) <g> Those that regularly ignore established conventions, despite being aware of them, are no doubt the same folks that fart at the dinner table, then laugh aloud while others are holding their napkin to their nose or running for fresh air. They don't care. Signature<sigh> JR >>Top posting is considered poor netiquette all over usenet. > > It's true, to the chagrin of many. Publically available usenet is rather young. Prior to the publically available internet as we know it, many of us sent emails, posted on news groups etc. through many other sources such as Fidonet, Compuserve, The Source or many many other networks. I started emailing and posting on newsgroups in the early 80's and ran my own node on Fidonet. During that time top posting was far more common and accepted. It was when the general public entered the spectrum that bottom posting became preferred. My guess is because once the general public entered the arena, proper quoting went down the drain. It really isn't a big deal either way except when excessive quoting of entire threads is done. Even at that, it doesn't bother me either way. People should post how they see fit. Not a big deal to argue about. > Publically available usenet is rather young. Prior to the publically > available internet as we know it, many of us sent emails, posted on news > groups etc. through many other sources such as Fidonet, Compuserve, The > Source or many many other networks. I started emailing and posting on > newsgroups in the early 80's and ran my own node on Fidonet. Same here. RIP 1/285:14 > During that time top posting was far more common and accepted. Not to my recollection or on my board. > People should post how they see fit. You fail to remember that there are still VERY many that are NOT on broadband or, worse, are getting their news via wireless dial-up. The value of proper quoting, in particular, is still very real. Signature:) JR Proper quoting is why it doesn't really matter whether one top or bottom posts. Lack of is a pain, especially when people quote entire threads and bottom post. I'll keep posting in usenet the same way it is expected in the business world with regards to emails. > You fail to remember that there are still VERY many that are NOT on broadband > or, worse, are getting their news via wireless dial-up. The value of proper > quoting, in particular, is still very real. Invalid statement. Go look in the Jeep based newsgroups and top posting is the norm there, for 3 examples. Tomes > Top posting is considered poor netiquette all over usenet. Has been for > years. Kinda like farting at the dinner table. > > So in essence you just farted. Please excuse yourself! > > jw > Invalid statement. Go look in the Jeep based newsgroups and top posting is > the norm there, for 3 examples. > Tomes Read this Invalid! Top-posting From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Top-posting means replying to a message above the original message. This may be a message in an Internet forum, an e-mail message or a Usenet post. Top-posting is considered improper by many definitions of Internet etiquette since it breaks down the flow of the thread: put that up your Jeep tailpipe and smoke it! The thread is stored online and shouldn't be quoted in the reply as so many seem to do. Whats more is the fact that emails, newsgroups etc. predate usenet and the public internet by over a decade. Top posting was the norm until the general idiot masses came online. Top posting is still the norm in the business world for emails. > Read this Invalid! > Top-posting [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > put that up your Jeep tailpipe and smoke it! > The thread is stored online and shouldn't be quoted in the reply as so > many seem to do. Whats more is the fact that emails, newsgroups etc. > predate usenet and the public internet by over a decade. Yep and we always bottom posted! > Top posting > was the norm until the general idiot masses came online. Only in your imagination > Top posting is > still the norm in the business world for emails. This ain't your pop sicle stand. You can run it any way you like! >>The thread is stored online and shouldn't be quoted in the reply as so >>many seem to do. Whats more is the fact that emails, newsgroups etc. >>predate usenet and the public internet by over a decade. > > Yep and we always bottom posted! Wrong. Compuserve, The Source, Fidonet and other early networks followed the business world practice of top posting. Today, business still follows this practice as the norm. > >>The thread is stored online and shouldn't be quoted in the reply as so > >>many seem to do. Whats more is the fact that emails, newsgroups etc. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > followed the business world practice of top posting. Today, business > still follows this practice as the norm. I was on plenty of BBS's back then. We all bottom posted. Compuserve and Prodigy both we always bottom posted. I don't know where you were? Maybe in a drug induced coma! > I was on plenty of BBS's back then. We all bottom posted. ...and EDITED our quotes. A second or third offense (not quoting or improperly quoting, not to mention TOP posting <gasp>) and you were relegated to Read Only. > Compuserve and Prodigy both we always bottom posted. I don't know > where you were? Maybe in a drug induced coma! We'll never know, but my guess is that he wasn't there at all. He was probably off playing with his Transformers<tm>. Signature:) JR > We'll never know, but my guess is that he wasn't there at all. He was > probably off playing with his Transformers<tm>. Fidonet 1:114/144. > Wrong. Compuserve, The Source, Fidonet and other early networks > followed the business world practice of top posting. You WERE in a vacuum. Your statement above reveals it. Those early services and networks PREDATED the business world's use of email (netmail, as it was originally called). Compu$pend, GEnie, FidoNet were were "well-oiled" machines before the business world began using email. >Today, business still follows this practice as the norm. Only because Microsoft started it. You can shout it from the rooftops in as many ways as you like: You are (sadly) mistaken. Sorry. Signature:( JR >>Today, business still follows this practice as the norm. > > Only because Microsoft started it. Why do you keep talking about Microsoft when business emails predates anything from MS by many many years? > You WERE in a vacuum. Your statement above reveals it. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Compu$pend, GEnie, FidoNet were were "well-oiled" machines before the business > world began using email. I think maybe you were in the vacuum.. I had over 200 computers worldwide linked for a private company before even DARPA had any linked. The ARPA/DARPA network just followed work done previously by some private companies. There were various conventions followed by various entities for communications. It was not until "personal computers" that a self created elite tried to tell everyone else what was "proper". The real reason behind some of the RFCs and network functionality are almost a joke now. My first modems were 600 baud and cost $600 apiece. They might last 6 months before needing repair. That type of thing led to some of the ways we still do things. The best thing that could happen for the future would be to trash TCP/IP and redo the protocol stacks! Jim -- MY first home computer was a PDP-11 ! > It was not until "personal computers" that > a self created elite tried to tell everyone else what was "proper". Yep! It wasn't until the flood gates opened and the masses rolled in. Hell, in Fidonet there was only a slight amount of moderation even needed in newsgroups (echos). People were more professional in their behaviour. I liked it when it was mostly dedicated hobbiests and professionals online. > Jim -- MY first home computer was a PDP-11 ! Heathkit? SignatureDon Bradner donb at arcatapet dot com www.arcatapet.net >> Jim -- MY first home computer was a PDP-11 ! > > Heathkit? Nope Dec PDP-11 running the RT-11 operating system. 2 8" floppys and I think about 8k of memory. Don't even remember the terminal- something 52 . It would do C so I wrote all my own software including a word processor. SignatureJim >>> Jim -- MY first home computer was a PDP-11 ! >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >something 52 . It would do C so I wrote all my own software including a >word processor. Oh. More unusual to find someone who had a personal PDP-11 that was not a Heathkit. Heath sold that puppy in kit form as the H-11, but everything was pure DEC. 1977-78 timeframe. SignatureDon Bradner donb at arcatapet dot com www.arcatapet.net > Oh. More unusual to find someone who had a personal PDP-11 that was > not a Heathkit. Heath sold that puppy in kit form as the H-11, but > everything was pure DEC. 1977-78 timeframe. The H-11 was the kit form of the LSI-11 which was the 1st of the PDP-11 series. I don't think heath ever made kits of the other PDP-11's such as the /30,/40 etc models. >>>> Jim -- MY first home computer was a PDP-11 ! >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >not a Heathkit. Heath sold that puppy in kit form as the H-11, but >everything was pure DEC. 1977-78 timeframe. We used a PDP-8 to program an IC mask photo-stepper in 1969/1970. Lever switch machine language programming. We had a template for help but it took hours to program the X-Y coordinates. Fun . Unk >miles <nope@nopers.com> wrote: >>>The thread is stored online and shouldn't be quoted in the reply as so >>>many seem to do. Whats more is the fact that emails, newsgroups etc. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >followed the business world practice of top posting. Today, business >still follows this practice as the norm. Token ring! Ethernet! Token ring! Ethernet! Token... Oops, wrong tired old argument. Sorry. SignatureDD See, you cut off what was invalid, thereby creating what looks like silliness here in this post. You can jump up and down and stammer all you wish, the fact is that you this: "Top posting is considered poor netiquette all over Usenet." This is invalid, false, whatever word one might wish to use because in the 3 examples listed top posting in in fact the norm. Also, just because you found some encyclopedia that agrees with you does not change the reality. Too funny.... Tomes >> Invalid statement. Go look in the Jeep based newsgroups and top posting >> is [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > put that up your Jeep tailpipe and smoke it! > See, you cut off what was invalid, thereby creating what looks like > silliness here in this post. You're the silly one! > You can jump up and down and stammer all you > wish, the fact is that you this: "Top posting is considered poor netiquette > all over Usenet." It is! > This is invalid, false, whatever word one might wish to > use because in the 3 examples listed top posting in in fact the norm. You gave the jeep group. One example of a bunch of illiterates like you! > Also, > just because you found some encyclopedia that agrees with you does not > change the reality. Its generally accepted as good info by most thinking folks. > Too funny.... I'm beginning to think you may be! > Tomes >> Top posting is considered poor netiquette all over usenet. >> Has been for years. > Invalid statement. Not at all. It is completely valid and still true. > Go look in the Jeep based newsgroups and top posting is > the norm there For many drivers, speeding is the norm as is running red lights. That fact doesn't make it proper. It is simply accepted. Besides, your cite is invalid: They drive Jeeps. What do THEY know? [ducking] Signature:) JR >>> Top posting is considered poor netiquette all over usenet. >>> Has been for years. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > [ducking] LOL Jim, I like your last statement <grin>. Jeepers are indeed a class unto themselves. It is the "all over Usenet" line that is invalid. Fact is in at least those 3 NGs top posting is indeed _not_ considered poor netiquette. This, by pure logic, invalidates the statement. Tomes (bottom posting here to follow the _local_ norm) >> Most thinking people do. Only the memory impaired need to re-read >> everything before they can reply. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > jw This is true, I survived the Usenet Wars of 1988 and this was one of the main infractions fought over! Top posting is for gays and pico liberal left winged batsards. It's the same principle in men and earrings. Left is right and right is wrong. Bottom is right and top is wrong..... Any other questions on netiquet can be solved at www.rsfckers.com SignatureMoParMaN---Remove Clothes To Reply! --SCUD Coordinates 32.61204 North: 96.92993 West-- Either that or they lack the skills to properly quote whats relevant necessitating the need to keep the thread intact and bottom post. Interesting thing to note is that in the business world replies to emails are almost always on top. > Most thinking people do. Only the memory impaired need to re-read > everything before they can reply. > > George Yep, only in Usenet is this aberration found in my experience. Top posting is the norm in biz, and interspersed is also used at times. Bottom posting is just not done in biz. > ..... > Interesting thing to note is that in the business world replies to emails > are almost always on top. > Interesting thing to note is that in the business world replies to > emails are almost always on top. Yep, no thanks to MicroSlop. In their classic [damn the conventions, we'll do it OUR way] form, they ignored the long-established convention and wrote Outlook to top post. The Lemmings followed. Signature:\ JR > Yep, no thanks to MicroSlop. In their classic [damn the conventions, we'll do > it OUR way] form, they ignored the long-established convention and wrote > Outlook to top post. The Lemmings followed. You gotta be kidding!!! Emails and news groups predate Outlook by well over a decade. So many such as yourself have no idea that people actually emailed and posted on news groups long before Windows, the public internet etc. Email and news groups existed before DOS!! Guess what, in those days bottom posting was a bad thing to do!! >> Yep, no thanks to MicroSlop. In their classic [damn the conventions, >> we'll do it OUR way] form, they ignored the long-established convention >> and wrote Outlook to top post. The Lemmings followed. > You gotta be kidding!!! Not in the least. > Emails and news groups predate Outlook by well over a decade. Agreed. But is wasn't until the internet found its way into everyone's home, and many began to use Outlook with its default top-posting of replies, that the bottom-posting convention took a beating. > So many such as yourself have no idea that people > actually emailed and posted on news groups long before Windows Such as me, eh? I was there BEFORE there WAS a world-wide web. I ran a multi-line BBS for seven years and operated a node on FidoNet. > Guess what, in those days bottom posting was a bad thing to do!! You obviously don't know what you are talking about or were in a different world back then. The convention was (and still is) to post an EDITED quote, then add your reply. SignatureJR > Agreed. But is wasn't until the internet found its way into everyone's home, > and many began to use Outlook with its default top-posting of replies, that > the bottom-posting convention took a beating. LOL. It was when the masses rolled into the scene is when bottom posting started becoming common. Look at the business world. Thats where it started. It is customary to top post when replying to a business email. It was the masses on the internet that began to deviate from that. > You obviously don't know what you are talking about or were in a different > world back then. The convention was (and still is) to post an EDITED quote, > then add your reply. Wrong. Business use predates the masses of the general public. It was and still is the practice to reply to emails at the top. > You obviously don't know what you are talking about or were in a > different world back then. The convention was (and still is) to > post > an EDITED quote, then add your reply. I never ran a BBS, but registered at and posted to several with the CP/M run Sanyo system with 8k memory and 160k floppy drive - no hard drive & 7" green monitor. If you wanted to lose your posting privileges back then, the quickest way was to top post!! # 2 and you were locked out. SignatureTom J Birthdays are good for you. The more you have, the longer you live. >> Yep, no thanks to MicroSlop. In their classic [damn the conventions, we'll do >> it OUR way] form, they ignored the long-established convention and wrote [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >public internet etc. Email and news groups existed before DOS!! Guess >what, in those days bottom posting was a bad thing to do!! For sure. In 1983 or 4, I had a Rat Shack 1200 PC clone with a 10 MEG HD and I don't recall how much memory. I used Conpuserve and had a 300 baud hard wire modem. HOG heaven! Tall Cotton! unk I see where Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@nospamredelfs.com> was among several posting (correctly, may I add) in favor of bottom posting. >Yep, no thanks to MicroSlop. In their classic [damn the conventions, >we'll do it OUR way] form, they ignored the long-established convention >and wrote Outlook to top post. Strangely enough, the only applicable 'convention' that would dictate how one posts to a newsgroup is that written English language is read from left to right and top to bottom. Here is my free advice: 1) Begin (at the top, which is where the beginning is) by identifying to WHOM you are responding. Most decent newsreaders can be set to do that automatically. 2) Next, QUOTE the _relevant_ portion of the text from the post you're addressing. The normal convention is to start each quoted line with the ">", as I did above. This is also an automatic feature of a good newsreader. (I use Agent and recommend it) 3) Now SNIP (delete, omit, edit out) all irrelevant verbiage. Even your own. 4) BELOW the preceding, provide your brilliant comments. Pithy is better than verbose, even though some idjits think quality means quantity. 5) Finally, sign with a real name. Witty/wise sig lines optional ................. The above lesson provided free of charge. FYI it is also a litmus test for morons: those who choose to take offense, refuse to follow the normal practice and respond with outrage are widely thought of as morons. Will Sill "A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices." William James Will Sill The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill On 2/28/06 9:32 AM, in article 14n802ldgtp6m484pvthaid0v75hsopu8h@4ax.com, > Will Sill Gosh >> Personally, I prefer top posts. > Most thinking people do. That should read, "Most CAVALIER people do." Having been presented with tenured conventions, only to reject them out-of-hand, reveals that person's cavalier attitude. > Only the memory impaired need to re-read > everything before they can reply. Unless, of course, they are newly joining the topic. Don't forget the occasional GAP in one's feed. > Only the memory impaired need to re-read > everything before they can reply. The important word here is "everything". If proper quoting is done, one isn't even presented with "everything". There are quoting conventions that are virtually unknown by too many and ignored by others. Top-posting is the lazy person's way of participating, with the bulk of them failing to edit one WORD of what is quoted below their top post. Then there's the most innocent of "violation": Replying to a message with [thanks] as the only new text. JR Same here. > Personally, I prefer top posts. how about middle posting...My wife says bottom or top, who cares, so long as you're getting your noodle wet. > Same here. > > > Personally, I prefer top posts. > how about middle posting...My wife says bottom or top, who cares, so long as > you're getting your noodle wet. Your wife has a noodle? >>how about middle posting...My wife says bottom or top, who cares, so long >>as you're getting your noodle wet.<< Now there's a woman with the right attitude. You better hang on to her. SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) TOP TOP -go TOP!!! Not that I am totally against being topless. :p > > > top post is good?? > > > go4 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > > Personally, I prefer top posts. Age old argument for and against in most any usenet group. Some people get bent out of shape for the silliest of reasons. Post where ya want. Not that big of a deal. Tom J wrote: >>top post is good?? >>go4 > > Top post, it seems, is bad in this group >Age old argument for and against in most any usenet group. Some people >get bent out of shape for the silliest of reasons. Post where ya want. > Not that big of a deal. Good, I'll just use your living room floor for a commode. SignatureFrank Tabor Well ya, usenet is a giant toilet for some. News groups didn't used to be that way. Not until the internet went public and the masses poured in. >>Age old argument for and against in most any usenet group. Some people >>get bent out of shape for the silliest of reasons. Post where ya want. >> Not that big of a deal. > > Good, I'll just use your living room floor for a commode. > >Age old argument for and against in most any usenet group. Some people > >get bent out of shape for the silliest of reasons. Post where ya want. > > Not that big of a deal. > > Good, I'll just use your living room floor for a commode. I'll have to admit, that was funny. And you'd probably do it too, you nasty rascal! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.