Words by Stuart Lawler [Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:46:01PM +0100]:
> > Maybe I'd be less abrupt if you and others would show some sign of being
> aware of the list guidelines. For example, you've once again top posted, and
> I'm sure you've seen messages regarding this many times now, as I know
> you're a regular on the list.
>
> Paul, firstly, my apologies for a somewhat delayed response to this thread.
>
> Perhaps instead of constantly ranting on about top posting, you might be so
> kind as to tell us why you and the other moderators here insist that people
> should not use it?
>
> I would think I speak for more than myself here when I say that at this
> point, I feel that I can't ask questions on this list any more, in case I
> upset the very strict posting rules that have been employed here.
>
> What, Paul, is so wrong with top posting? Please do enlighten us, and not
> just tell us that we shouldn't do it.
>

A: Because it messes up 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?

So it is bad, yes. Not as bad as thread highjacking or then again,
maybe it is.

I tend to use a X-Reply header to reply to top-posters. Can't really go
more top and annoying than that.

-- 
Jose Celestino
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.msversus.org/     ; http://techp.org/petition/show/1
http://www.vinc17.org/noswpat.en.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
"If you would have your slaves remain docile, teach them hymns."
    -- Ed Weathers ("The Empty Box")