On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 21:28:39 -0700, Blinky the Shark
> wrote:

>sf wrote:
>
>>>>>sf wrote:
>>>>>> I'm not justifying anything. Bottom posting sucks because
>>>>>> attributions don't stay with the message body.
>>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:02:27 -0700, Blinky the Shark
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>The do unless someone or someone's software ****s them up. Can't blame
>>>>>inter- or bottom-posting for that.
>>>>
>>>sf wrote:
>>>> OK, show me one example here in rfc, including anything from you,
>>>> where the identification stays with the text in a multi quote post.
>>>> At least with consistent top posting that can happen. Bottom posting
>>>> sucks.
>>>
>> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 20:47:57 -0700, Blinky the Shark
>> > wrote:
>>>First, define what you mean by "the identification stays with the text",
>>>so I don't bother meeting your challenge only to find out that I
>>>*misunderstood* your challenge.
>>
>> Show me something that looks like the above. It happens naturally (in
>> reverse order, which I prefer also) by top posting.
>
>Okay, I see what you mean. But in your example, of course, there's a
>missing attribution - to my last post - at the top, where attribution
>belongs, so the chain up there is broken.
>
>No, that's not going to happen with inter- or bottom-posting. I do see
>some people manually adding stuff like
>
>Blinky said:
>
>to each block when they bottom-post. What a waste of time.

In that case, bottom posting doesn't work. Top posting is the best
option.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West