As a blind person, I realize that I represent a small minority perspective on this topic. For whatever it's worth, what I'll call "contextual top posting" works much better for me than traditional quoting. With the latter, I have to scroll my speech output through material that has already been posted before. I cannot immediately glance to the new material below, and there is no available mechanism that allows me to jump between quoted and new material, especially since quoting conventions vary, even though distinctions between quoted and new material may be visually apparent. Often, there are messages with long quotes at the beginning, nearly the whole original post. I don't understand why this is better for sighted people than reading the original post in its true form by simply glancing further down the page if a reference to that is needed. Often, there are quotes of quotes, and it is confusing who said what, and why the interaction was necessary to quote. With topics of interest, I sometimes get so discouraged by the amount of initial quoting that I give up following the thread. Sometimes, I press Control+End (keyboard techniques work better than the mouse) to go directly to the end of the message in the hope that I can then UpArrow a few times to get to the beginning of the new material. Often, there is a signature of a few lines at the bottom, so this technique ends up not saving me time. When following a topic of interest, I sometimes want to participate in the discussion by posting my comments. Unfortunately, creating a properly quoted message, perhaps the combination of current screen reader and Microsoft Outlook technology, is enough of a chore that it is usually not worth the effort. When I've top posted instead as a practical alternative, criticism usually results from some members of the list, often in a derisive manner, so I'm reluctant to do that. The most efficient approach for me, both for reading and writing messages, might be called contextual top posting. I understand the problem of top posting with sentences that do not reference the points to which one is responding. That practice does not help me either. I generally think it's possible, however, to insert phrases that provide sufficient context to anyone who has been following the message thread. For example, one could say "I agree that X is better than Y because of Z" rather than just "I agree its better because of Z." Or, one might begin a sentence with "Regarding the X issue," rather than just assuming that one knows the point being referenced in the previous message below. With this approach, I also suggest removing all but the message to which one is replying with a top post, that is, delete its antecedents if they happen to be included. Additionally, if the previous message is long, e.g., a long code excerpt, then delete unnecessary parts to the response. I hope this perspective is helpful. Regards, Jamal