Just Another Victim of the -spamfilter-t Morality wrote:
>     My point is that just because _you_ don't find top posting confusing
> doesn't mean it's a good idea to top post.  Since you are trying to
> communicate with us and we (at least, I) find top-posting confusing, it
> would be better if you were to refrain from it.  You're trying to get 
> your
> point across to us, right?

I have accepted and acknowledged that this list requires bottom-posting
not only to abide by the rules, but to prevent inconveniencing the
majority of the long-time members.  That is not at debate.

But again, the OP asked in general, and in general, I say it's a
stalemate.  Neither side is 'right or wrong', 'polite or impolite',
'confusing or clear', or any pair of opposites assuming the person
posting the message knows how to get his/her point across.

> Well, if you can't speak for others, why would you say things like 
"I
> think we're all guilty of ego-centrism here."  You are clearly speaking 
for
> others when you say that they are, too...

'Speaking for others' means you are stating how they feel, not what they
have done.  Instead, I was noting the tendency for people in this thread
to assume everyone else was like them.  Usenet posters assumed they were
the largest group, List posters and Web posters did the same thing.
Only 1 of those groups can be right, and I haven't seen statistics to
back any of them up.  Everyone also assumes that their posting
preference is best for everyone, or at least 'least harmful' for
everyone.

Back on the polite issue, I will agree that posting contrary to the
groups wishes is impolite.  But when the group's wishes (the world's
wishes) are unknown, it is not impolite to post in a manner that does
not bother you.  I will continue to only bottom-post here and top and
bottom post as I see the need  to everyone else.

My argument stands:  Top-posting is not inherently impolite or
incorrect.  It deepnds on where you are doing it.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.