Sorry for posting here, but I don't know where to ask this.

I have no idea how people view newsgroups other than the way I do, using the
microsoft website with a regular browser.

Whenever I respond to a post, I always delete the previous response text, so
as to make the thread webpage shorter. Is there a reason I should leave that
text in? For instance, does a real newsgroup application not show previous
posts by default? I read the newsgroup faq, but it just says you can delete
the previous text "if you want to". I just want to know what the etiquette
is.

Thanks.

Personally, I usually leave the existing question at the bottom (I top-post).

Although, when the thread takes a turn, I do sometimes snip the stuff that no
longer applies.

As a general rule, I don't usually read the original post. I'll start with the
first response. I figure that I can read the question at the bottom of that
response.

I don't think anyone would be upset if you snipped most of the original message,
but left enough so that others could still see the point of the question.

justme wrote:

Sorry for posting here, but I don't know where to ask this.

I have no idea how people view newsgroups other than the way I do, using the
microsoft website with a regular browser.

Whenever I respond to a post, I always delete the previous response text, so
as to make the thread webpage shorter. Is there a reason I should leave that
text in? For instance, does a real newsgroup application not show previous
posts by default? I read the newsgroup faq, but it just says you can delete
the previous text "if you want to". I just want to know what the etiquette
is.

Thanks.

--

Dave Peterson

justme,

The quoting of the post to which you're replying is a function of the newsreader. In Outlook
Express (a newsreader as well as email client), it's "Include message in reply" in Tools -
Options - Send tab. It's done to include the entire thread for the convenience of the
reader. Since text doesn't take a lot of data (as compared with images -- one picture is
worth a whole lot more than a thousand words), it's not generally considered excessive
overhead to include it in posts.

The norm has been to "top post," meaning add your reply at the top of the quoted stuff (the
earlier part of the thread). That makes the thread work chronologically upward, with the
most recent part at the top, although some people have started bottom-posting. When
bottom-posting gets mixed up with top posting, it makes it more difficult to go
chronologically through the thread. "Deet-dee-dee." (Carlos Mencia).

You can set up Outlook Express to go directly to the microsoft newsgroups. Tools -
Accounts - News tab. Click Add - News. In the "Name" box, put your name or handle the way
you want it to appear in your posts. In the next, Email address, box, put something
bogus -- not your real email address, or the spam-bots will get you, and your mailbox will
sink to the center of the earth. The news server is news.microsoft.com. If you don't have
Outlook Express, you can download it from microsoft.com.
--
Earl Kiosterud
www.smokeylake.com

Note: Top-posting has been the norm here.
Some folks prefer bottom-posting.
But if you bottom-post to a reply that's
already top-posted, the thread gets messy.
When in Rome...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"justme" wrote in message
...
Sorry for posting here, but I don't know where to ask this.

I have no idea how people view newsgroups other than the way I do, using the
microsoft website with a regular browser.

Whenever I respond to a post, I always delete the previous response text, so
as to make the thread webpage shorter. Is there a reason I should leave that
text in? For instance, does a real newsgroup application not show previous
posts by default? I read the newsgroup faq, but it just says you can delete
the previous text "if you want to". I just want to know what the etiquette
is.

Thanks.

Just my opinion....

Many times I'll just "quote" a specific piece of the text that I want to
directly address but I leave the entire original message. Like this:

Is there a reason I should leave that text in?

Leaving the previous text makes it easier to follow the flow of the thread
especially if it grows into a long thread with many replies. (provided all
respondents post in the same direction, all top post or all bottom post.)

It can really mess up the flow if you top post and then someone bottom posts
to your reply.

Biff

"justme" wrote in message
...
Sorry for posting here, but I don't know where to ask this.

I have no idea how people view newsgroups other than the way I do, using
the
microsoft website with a regular browser.

Whenever I respond to a post, I always delete the previous response text,
so
as to make the thread webpage shorter. Is there a reason I should leave
that
text in? For instance, does a real newsgroup application not show previous
posts by default? I read the newsgroup faq, but it just says you can
delete
the previous text "if you want to". I just want to know what the
etiquette
is.

Thanks.

Tue, 19 Jun 2007 19:02:10 -0700 from justme
:

Whenever I respond to a post, I always delete the previous response text, so
as to make the thread webpage shorter. Is there a reason I should leave that
text in?

Please see http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#quote

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/

Tue, 19 Jun 2007 22:28:56 -0400 from Earl Kiosterud
:
The norm has been to "top post," meaning add your reply at the top
of the quoted stuff (the earlier part of the thread).

With all due respect, I disagree vehemently. The norm is to trim
quotes and post one's response after the trimmed quote, just as I've
done here.

An awful lot of people get it upside down, but then a lot of people
believe in astrology too.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/

The norm is to trim quotes and post one's response after
the trimmed quote, just as I've done here.

Depends on how you define "norm".

In these groups the overwhelming majority top post. So, is that the norm for
these groups?

Biff

Or Chip Pearson's notes:
http://cpearson.com/excel/newposte.htm
(especially #11)

When in Rome, ....

Stan Brown wrote:

Tue, 19 Jun 2007 19:02:10 -0700 from justme
:

Whenever I respond to a post, I always delete the previous response text, so
as to make the thread webpage shorter. Is there a reason I should leave that
text in?

Please see http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#quote

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/

--

Dave Peterson