3 ms·

I quite like this article, but I disagree with the conclusion, although my opinion is actually in the body: "... And when the thread is short, possibly just a

I quite like this article, but I disagree with the conclusion, although my opinion is actually in the body: "... And when the thread is short, possibly just a single email, it's easy for the receiver to see the context, and to know to what you are replying." So, in short threads, top posting is better for both the writer and reader. I think calling it "procrastination" is infair -- procrastination is about delaying or avoid tasks which will have to be done. Top posting is "agile" -- why put extra work into something now, which 98% of the time will never been needed?

ColinWright 7y ago
I think you're missing the important point. When the thread is short, possibly just a single email, it doesn't matter what you do. In-line, top-, and bottom-posting all cost about the same. I disagree when you say: > in short threads, top posting is better for both the writer and reader. In short threads I still want to read top to bottom, I still want to see the context before the reply. In a short thread, in-line posting (provided your client supports it) is (a) the same cost, and (b) is future-proofing your thread. It's in-line posting that's "agile", not top-posting.
- CJefferson 7y ago
  I tend to read email threads in order, so I already know what the previous message was. I don't want to have to scan past it to find the new content. If I do need to see the previous message, it is there below the new content. I think this is just a disagreement on reading order -- I want to see the reply before the context, you want to see the context before the reply. Unfortunately, without email gaining more structure/context, we can't both be made happy.
  - ColinWright 7y ago
    I usually have so many email discussions going on there's no way I can keep the context in my head. I come to each email without a context, so I need to come up to speed. And each email can have several points running in parallel, so I get a collection of comments, none of which mean anything without their context, so I need to go hunting. Top-posting kills my productivity. With in-line replies, especially with colour coding (as most email clients now do) you can skim down to find the reply first, if that's what you refer. It seems to me that in-line replies would serve you just as well as they serve me. But you're certainly right that without more structure, email in it's current form can't make both of us happy, and for me, it's simply vile.
    - magicalhippo 7y ago
      Could have been neat if the email client would detect if it was top or bottom posting, and have an option to scroll to the new bits automatically...
      - e12e 7y ago
        To a certain extent this is worse. Gmail have (or had, I'm not keeping up) this feature that it would display threaded "as-if" everyone bottom-posted, but default to send top-posted. If two people were using Gmail - no problem. If you were using a "proper" mua, it was a constant struggle to get to through the replies. Outlook was/is no better - the infuriating part about Gmail is/was that to the Gmail user everything seemed OK - but at least for the outlook user they knew they were too-posting. Unfortunately, most outlook user are stuck in outlook - so there's no hope to change the situation for them. I actually believe the state of Gmail and outlook is part of the "death" of email - and "need" for forums etc (that and the death of usenet news. Incidentally why the d-lang forums are so interesting - I just whish it was a bit more packaged for setting up just forum+news (dfeed https://forum.dlang.org/help) https://forum.dlang.org/help)).
    - CJefferson 7y ago
      Please take what I'm about to say as a (hopefully) interesting discussion, and not an attack. We've never met in real life, so neither of us knows what's in the other's head! I feel like, based on reading your article, you believe that anyone who likes top-posting is just lazy or confused about what's best -- for example "It seems to me that in-line replies would serve you just as well as they serve me." So, you seem convinced that what I want makes your life miserable (not denying that!), but what you want would make me, and all the other top posters in the world (which, as you say, is most email writers and also email program creators) basically as happy as we are now. This isn't true. I like top-posting on most threads. I don't like in-line. In-line tends to encourage (in my experience) massive posts, where people end up having several related conversations in parallel, and also huge point-by-point rebuttals. I'm NOT saying you have to "join us", and I'd certainly be happy with a new answer which makes us all happy! But don't assume we just need to be "educated" against top-posting.

ColinWright 7y ago

I think you're missing the important point. When the thread is short, possibly just a single email, it doesn't matter what you do. In-line, top-, and bottom-posting all cost about the same. I disagree when you say: > in short threads, top posting is better for both the writer and reader. In short threads I still want to read top to bottom, I still want to see the context before the reply. In a short thread, in-line posting (provided your client supports it) is (a) the same cost, and (b) is future-proofing your thread. It's in-line posting that's "agile", not top-posting.

CJefferson 7y ago
I tend to read email threads in order, so I already know what the previous message was. I don't want to have to scan past it to find the new content. If I do need to see the previous message, it is there below the new content. I think this is just a disagreement on reading order -- I want to see the reply before the context, you want to see the context before the reply. Unfortunately, without email gaining more structure/context, we can't both be made happy.
- ColinWright 7y ago
  I usually have so many email discussions going on there's no way I can keep the context in my head. I come to each email without a context, so I need to come up to speed. And each email can have several points running in parallel, so I get a collection of comments, none of which mean anything without their context, so I need to go hunting. Top-posting kills my productivity. With in-line replies, especially with colour coding (as most email clients now do) you can skim down to find the reply first, if that's what you refer. It seems to me that in-line replies would serve you just as well as they serve me. But you're certainly right that without more structure, email in it's current form can't make both of us happy, and for me, it's simply vile.
  - magicalhippo 7y ago
    Could have been neat if the email client would detect if it was top or bottom posting, and have an option to scroll to the new bits automatically...
    - e12e 7y ago
      To a certain extent this is worse. Gmail have (or had, I'm not keeping up) this feature that it would display threaded "as-if" everyone bottom-posted, but default to send top-posted. If two people were using Gmail - no problem. If you were using a "proper" mua, it was a constant struggle to get to through the replies. Outlook was/is no better - the infuriating part about Gmail is/was that to the Gmail user everything seemed OK - but at least for the outlook user they knew they were too-posting. Unfortunately, most outlook user are stuck in outlook - so there's no hope to change the situation for them. I actually believe the state of Gmail and outlook is part of the "death" of email - and "need" for forums etc (that and the death of usenet news. Incidentally why the d-lang forums are so interesting - I just whish it was a bit more packaged for setting up just forum+news (dfeed https://forum.dlang.org/help) https://forum.dlang.org/help)).
  - CJefferson 7y ago
    Please take what I'm about to say as a (hopefully) interesting discussion, and not an attack. We've never met in real life, so neither of us knows what's in the other's head! I feel like, based on reading your article, you believe that anyone who likes top-posting is just lazy or confused about what's best -- for example "It seems to me that in-line replies would serve you just as well as they serve me." So, you seem convinced that what I want makes your life miserable (not denying that!), but what you want would make me, and all the other top posters in the world (which, as you say, is most email writers and also email program creators) basically as happy as we are now. This isn't true. I like top-posting on most threads. I don't like in-line. In-line tends to encourage (in my experience) massive posts, where people end up having several related conversations in parallel, and also huge point-by-point rebuttals. I'm NOT saying you have to "join us", and I'd certainly be happy with a new answer which makes us all happy! But don't assume we just need to be "educated" against top-posting.