Shawn Tan(shawn.tan@aeste.net) is reported to have said:
> 
> but when O/OE come out, it automatically left a few empty lines at the top and 
> placed the cursor there.. so, in order not to top post, i'd have to delete 
> off the few blank lines..

I seem to recall that there is an RFC that makes it mandatory to have
one (1) blank line after the headers.  I have no idea why gmail adds
another, but that blank line is nothing compared to the multiple lines
not realated to a reply that are not trimmed off.
> 
> why most unix people don't top post: cause there are alternative email clients 
> to O/OE and they don't assume that you want to top post..

If you insist on top posting, go ahead.  If it's too much work for you
to make your reply easier for others to read nad understand, go ahead
and top post.  No one is forcing you to do anything else.  This is
just a disscusion of the Good or Bad of top posting.  

I would think some people would appreciate the information that has
come out in this thread.  Olin has shown how to make context posting
possible with Outlook by simply configuring it correctly.  Maybe
someone else will show how to configure Outlook/mozilla/Thunderbird to
thread properly as well.  Wouldn't it be nice to not have to figure
out what thread a message like "Subject: [PIC} Re: 16F648A" belongs to
out of the 500-600 I have above it?  If only he (or is mail client) had 
included the MessageID header we wouldn't have to wonder what thread
it belongs to or just delete it in frustration.

I commend Xiao Fan for asking the question, even if he steadfastly
sticks to top posting.  It's his right, after all.

Wayne
-- 
Signatures > 4 lines are rude.
_______________________________________________________
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist