4 ms·

Bottom-posting, due to its falling out of favor in the mainstream, has become a shibboleth that signifies a certain degree of competence with technology and Int

Bottom-posting, due to its falling out of favor in the mainstream, has become a shibboleth that signifies a certain degree of competence with technology and Internet communication in general. While I'd certainly prefer it if everyone I corresponded with followed proper quoting etiquette, I have to say that it's also fairly convenient to glance at an email message and immediately be able to infer with reasonable confidence what level of expertise to expect from the stranger on the other end (at least in the context of public technical discussions). Meanwhile, I'll keep trimming quotes and bottom-posting, whether or not anyone else is doing it. It just makes sense, damn it. I know it's a losing battle, and I don't care. See also: users/MUAs that send HTML only instead of multipart/alternative or just plain text. I read mail with Mutt, and when I open a message and see nothing but angle-bracketed noise, it's almost guaranteed to be an unwanted marketing message or solicitation from some online service I've signed up for in the past. The visual garbage makes it easy to just tab to the next message in a split second without a thought. On the rare occasion that it's something that I actually care to read, I can pipe it through Pandoc to render it legible with a couple of keystrokes.

stock_toaster 14y ago
> Bottom-posting, due to its falling out of favor in the mainstream, has become a shibboleth that signifies a certain degree of competence with technology and Internet communication in general. I don't find this true at all. I get quite the mix of response styles from people of all walks of 'techno competency' -- sometimes a MUA defaults, especially mobile ones. As mentioned elsewhere in the comments, in business settings (often with engineers) top-posting is also very common. Not everyone uses Mutt. I think attempting to label people who don't follow your preference as less technical competent is a bit myopic. Further, it could even be considered rude to start bottom posting in a chain of existing top-posting-only. That said, I do prefer bottom posting when it makes sense, and practice it when it is convenient or the social norm of the community I am conversing within.
- tmhedberg 14y ago
  It is only one data point among many, I admit, and it would be unfair to characterize someone's expertise based solely on their choice of email quoting style. But in my (completely anecdotal) experience, there is more often than not a correlation between the two. Maybe it's just the email discussion lists that I frequent, where bottom posting tends to be the norm, and top-posted messages mostly come from people who could have answered their own question had they bothered to spend 30 seconds on Google before going to the mailing list.
  - stock_toaster 14y ago
    Thanks for the background. In a community specific setting, it may well be a useful indicator. I assumed you had meant it broadly. I hypothesize that it would be a far less useful distinguishing characteristic in that case.
laureny 14y ago
> it's also fairly convenient to glance at an email message and immediately be able to infer with reasonable confidence what level of expertise to expect from the stranger on the other end You are confusing "level of expertise" with "number of years on the Internet". Knowing the Internet seniority of the person you are responding to is an unremarkable data point in all but arcane conversations about the Internet itself (and even then, it's still of dubious value). I used to be on your side (old Usenet dog here) but these days, I am convinced that top posting is actually a more productive way of communicating for a bunch of reasons: - Most of the time, you know the context of the conversation so reading the new content at the top of the message saves you time. - Most old Internet dogs suck at quoting either because they've never learned how to summarize or because they are cutting out the parts of the message they don't want you to see (either intentionally or accidentally). Some will cut too much text, other will quote twenty lines to add one, but either way, you end up visually hunting the new content interleaved with several levels of previous quoting, which is tiresome and entirely avoided by top posting.
- InclinedPlane 14y ago
  Yup. Just because you're old and crotchety and refuse to change your ways doesn't mean you are more experienced or right. I am sympathetic, I used to read all my email through a terminal client, and I fought the bottom-posting good fight on usenet back in the day. But those norms aren't today's norms. It's a different world and those arguments don't hold the force they used to. It's time to move on. If you insist on being cranky and uncompromising about something try picking something that actually matters, there are lots of choices.
mattmanser 14y ago
Seriously? I have come to associate this particular style as meaning the emailer/poster is going to be an unhelpful, holier than thou, pedantic ass-hole. It's a shibboleth without doubt, but not for the clique you think. > I was walking down the street Better known as a sidewalk > when I had a revelation Oh what pray tell? >that not many people actually use NoSQL There's a distinction between idiots and people you fail to comprehend. > And so I no longer worried that I used relational databases What the poster here fails to understand because of his miniscule brain is that NoSQL is so fundamentally superior to relational databases that only an idiot would use any other thing. It's not even worth saying. Though I took the trouble just now to enlighten this poorly educated OP who obviously shouldn't ever touch a computer again.
- tmhedberg 14y ago
  I agree that inline replies, when taken to the extreme that you illustrate, are more asinine than they are useful. Personally, I tend to reply to a paragraph or two at a time, a style which doesn't, in my opinion, have the same "you idiot" rhetorical feel. It's just easier to read and understand than a giant block of text responding to several unrelated points, followed by a giant untrimmed quote. Not all bottom posting/inline quoting is of the holier-than-thou nature. :)
  - mattmanser 14y ago
    True, there is a difference, that is a style you tend to to see on the more technical mailing groups.
- FixThisMess 14y ago
  Yawn. More infantile railing against actually LEARNING something. How DARE anyone point out anything that's wrong, rude, or ignorant. Get someone to change your diaper.
- gte910h 14y ago
  Bottom posts often send up the hairs on the back of my neck for this reason

stock_toaster 14y ago

> Bottom-posting, due to its falling out of favor in the mainstream, has become a shibboleth that signifies a certain degree of competence with technology and Internet communication in general. I don't find this true at all. I get quite the mix of response styles from people of all walks of 'techno competency' -- sometimes a MUA defaults, especially mobile ones. As mentioned elsewhere in the comments, in business settings (often with engineers) top-posting is also very common. Not everyone uses Mutt. I think attempting to label people who don't follow your preference as less technical competent is a bit myopic. Further, it could even be considered rude to start bottom posting in a chain of existing top-posting-only. That said, I do prefer bottom posting when it makes sense, and practice it when it is convenient or the social norm of the community I am conversing within.

tmhedberg 14y ago
It is only one data point among many, I admit, and it would be unfair to characterize someone's expertise based solely on their choice of email quoting style. But in my (completely anecdotal) experience, there is more often than not a correlation between the two. Maybe it's just the email discussion lists that I frequent, where bottom posting tends to be the norm, and top-posted messages mostly come from people who could have answered their own question had they bothered to spend 30 seconds on Google before going to the mailing list.
- stock_toaster 14y ago
  Thanks for the background. In a community specific setting, it may well be a useful indicator. I assumed you had meant it broadly. I hypothesize that it would be a far less useful distinguishing characteristic in that case.

laureny 14y ago

> it's also fairly convenient to glance at an email message and immediately be able to infer with reasonable confidence what level of expertise to expect from the stranger on the other end You are confusing "level of expertise" with "number of years on the Internet". Knowing the Internet seniority of the person you are responding to is an unremarkable data point in all but arcane conversations about the Internet itself (and even then, it's still of dubious value). I used to be on your side (old Usenet dog here) but these days, I am convinced that top posting is actually a more productive way of communicating for a bunch of reasons: - Most of the time, you know the context of the conversation so reading the new content at the top of the message saves you time. - Most old Internet dogs suck at quoting either because they've never learned how to summarize or because they are cutting out the parts of the message they don't want you to see (either intentionally or accidentally). Some will cut too much text, other will quote twenty lines to add one, but either way, you end up visually hunting the new content interleaved with several levels of previous quoting, which is tiresome and entirely avoided by top posting.

InclinedPlane 14y ago
Yup. Just because you're old and crotchety and refuse to change your ways doesn't mean you are more experienced or right. I am sympathetic, I used to read all my email through a terminal client, and I fought the bottom-posting good fight on usenet back in the day. But those norms aren't today's norms. It's a different world and those arguments don't hold the force they used to. It's time to move on. If you insist on being cranky and uncompromising about something try picking something that actually matters, there are lots of choices.

mattmanser 14y ago

Seriously? I have come to associate this particular style as meaning the emailer/poster is going to be an unhelpful, holier than thou, pedantic ass-hole. It's a shibboleth without doubt, but not for the clique you think. > I was walking down the street Better known as a sidewalk > when I had a revelation Oh what pray tell? >that not many people actually use NoSQL There's a distinction between idiots and people you fail to comprehend. > And so I no longer worried that I used relational databases What the poster here fails to understand because of his miniscule brain is that NoSQL is so fundamentally superior to relational databases that only an idiot would use any other thing. It's not even worth saying. Though I took the trouble just now to enlighten this poorly educated OP who obviously shouldn't ever touch a computer again.

tmhedberg 14y ago
I agree that inline replies, when taken to the extreme that you illustrate, are more asinine than they are useful. Personally, I tend to reply to a paragraph or two at a time, a style which doesn't, in my opinion, have the same "you idiot" rhetorical feel. It's just easier to read and understand than a giant block of text responding to several unrelated points, followed by a giant untrimmed quote. Not all bottom posting/inline quoting is of the holier-than-thou nature. :)
- mattmanser 14y ago
  True, there is a difference, that is a style you tend to to see on the more technical mailing groups.
FixThisMess 14y ago
Yawn. More infantile railing against actually LEARNING something. How DARE anyone point out anything that's wrong, rude, or ignorant. Get someone to change your diaper.
gte910h 14y ago
Bottom posts often send up the hairs on the back of my neck for this reason