I’ve heard people complain about “top posting” before, but I didn’t actually search the web for a definition until today.
My own habits haven’t violated etiquette too badly, I guess.
I’ve heard people complain about “top posting” before, but I didn’t actually search the web for a definition until today.
My own habits haven’t violated etiquette too badly, I guess.
I prefer bottom posting but Outlook users, in general, make this rather hard. :)
As I recall, Gmail also require more effort to bottom post than “click reply and start typing”.
Indeed it does. Wondering why that became a thing when they were developing Outlook and Gmail. There must have been some thought progress around it.
The busy executives don’t need to think about trimming anymore. I’m sure that’s all there is to it. Stupidification.
Bottom posting is an unhelpful habit that has been passed on five-monkeys style from the days when infrastructure was less reliable and client software didn’t handle threading well.
This doesn’t make sense. If threading was unreliable you’d want to top-post to preserve the thread. Nowadays, most email clients like Outlook and GMail present threading less fully than Usenet readers of the mid-80s. The readers needed that because messages were often missing or out-of-order.
Bottom-posting is not an unquestioned habit. It’s a technique for writing long replies to specific points in a long, large thread. That’s not most email conversations anymore.