> it the 'classical' way. ;) I find top-posted replies easier to read, it's
> quicker, for me anyway, to view an entire conversation just based on jumping
> to each email received in chronological order with the same topic.

Then how do you know what someone is responding to? My problem with
any-type of non-inline responding is that it lacks precision. For
example, you know that I am specifically responding to what you said
quoted above.

> at least, there's no appreciable downsides to doing it, because you do have
> the original message below the reply for clarity or context should you wish
> to read it

Which is even more confusing than when someone replies inline.

> It's the classic 'old skool vs. nu skool' debate once again - I guess I'm in
> the nu skool camp of email users insofar as method in which I write my
> replies :)

Or, conversely, you're in the old-old-school. You might as well be
writing letters, no? :-)

> Thoughts? Obvious pros/cons for top/bottom posting?

In-lining (including bottom posting, which is basically an in-line reply
with only one thing needing a reply) gives context and removes confusion.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
PGP Key: http://www.mattcaron.net/pgp_key.txt
 ~~ Matt Caron ~~