I've been bottom posting since you asked, but don't actually see why it's such a big deal - unless you're wanting to reply to specific points one by one, as opposed to just quoting the original post for context. IMO it's just what you're used to more than anything - with our work intranet newsgroups the convention is to top post, so I've got pretty used to it, and don't really find it a drag at all, and as you say it's easier (my mail client wants me to write at the top). If there's a need to reply to individual points, then our convention on those NGs is to use the keyword "inline" at the top, and then bottom post with replies interspersed as necessary, but personally I actually find that more cumbersome unless it's really needed, so try to avoid it. Exactly why is that harder to read than if I'd quoted the post I'm replying to which you'd already read (or written) at the top? You'd just have to skip over it before getting to the part of interest. Chris (always happy to engage in some pointless email etiquette pedantry, hence why I got sucked in here in the first place!) On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 7:50 PM, Vitaliy wrote: > Michael Algernon wrote: > >I like top posting.... others like bottom posting. I love reading > > backwards ( especially novels ) > > I think you just have to go with the flow or admit everyone is wrong. > > I didn't say that Chris was wrong, I just asked him to consider changing > the > way he posts (it's conceivable that he never gave it much thought). > > I myself used to top post, it was certainly easier than bottom posting. > Then > someone pointed out that it makes it more difficult for the reader(s). > After > some arguing, I realized that my motives were selfish, so I changed my > ways. > -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist