How about you point me to the "rules" that explain how to "quote properly" and which side of the quoted text is appropriate to reply on?
Betcha can't.
The fact is, no matter how much you whine and cry about posting styles, there is no "right" or "wrong" - just the way that makes sense to you (mostly because you're stupid, I admit), and the way that makes sense to me. If I'm replying to a specific quote or idea, then yes, I will apply it in context and trim as appropriate (a la this reply). If I'm continuing a general discussion, then it's stupid to re-read or have to scroll past dozens of lines of poo I've already read to find the new text. In fact, it's moronic. It's kinda like sorting your email so all the NEW messages are all the way at the bottom of the list. I want to see what's NEW, not rehash the same poo again.
The fact of the matter is that bottom-posting evolved in the days when you couldn't simply point and click at a message to jump to any message in a thread. Often, newsreaders didn't even thread messages in the first place, so you might read a message that was an immediate reply to a message you read 37 messages ago. Nowadays, most newsreading software is a bit more intelligent, even if most newsreading PEOPLE are not.
Bushamerica $3 gas is here NOW 4729If you raise CAFE enough, SUV's will become pointless. People who really need to haul stuff will fork over the additional money for one, and everybody else...
