On Tue 14 Oct 2008 07:28:41a, James Silverton told us...

> Nancy wrote on Tue, 14 Oct 2008 09:38:18 -0400:
>
>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>> On Tue 14 Oct 2008 12:07:56a, Blinky the Shark told us...
>>>
>>>> You are indeed misunderstanding. She wants *each block of
>>>> text* *throughout the message* to have an indvidually
>>>> prepended an attribution like I will do manually for the
>>>> rest of this reply...
>>>
>>> Yes, I did indeed misunderstand.
>
>> It's ridiculous. I imagine it's tough to read a book if one
>> has that much trouble following along.
>
>>>> It sucks in email, as well. It have no problems with it for
>>>> languages that are read from bottom to top, but that's not
>>>> English.
>>>
>>> As far as e-mail, I disagree. Since the inception of
>>> intra-company e-mail, it has been a common and expected
>>> practice to top post when replying.
>
>> That's work. I wouldn't expect it or like it in personal
>> email.
>
> There's a difference since work email is often an immediate personal
> answer to a question. In a newsgroup, the reply may appear later in time
> and others who may be able to contribute need to find out about it.

Oh, I wasn't suggesting that because work email is usually top posted that
this should also follow in newsgroups, only pointing out the difference.
Some feel that e-maiil should also be bottom posted. That is what I
disagree with, in business at least. At work, depending on the content of
the e-mail I receive, I either top post or inter-post if responding to
numerous paragraphs.

> It's interesting that the original topic was catfish which are bottom
> feeders!
>
<G>


--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Tuesday, 10(X)/14(XIV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
3wks 6dys 15hrs 24mins
*******************************************
'Now cut that out!!' - Jack Benny
*******************************************