A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Student Pilot lands short of runway



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #2  
Old May 30th 04, 05:36 PM
mike regish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ok. I'm going to break my promise to myself again because I'm just
overwhelmingly curious about this.

I've stated a reason why top posting is a personal preference of mine. But
the argument against top posting seems to be primarily one of etiquette-or
netiquette. To me this is like saying that it's not proper etiquette to fly
a high wing plane (or low wing depending on what you fly). I read them
all-top or bottom. I just prefer top. I prefer a high wing because I like to
look down and I like to take pictures. I have absolutely nothing against
people who fly low wings. I'm sure they have their reasons for that
particular preference. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. I
prefer top posting because I like to go from message to message with the
arrow keys rather than the mouse when I can. Normal etiquette has to do with
things like where the forks and knives go in a dinner setting. I can find
them as long as they're somewhere on the table. I don't care where you put
them, but in formal setting there is a "right" side and a "wrong" side,
according to etiquette. Again, I'm not going to stop patronizing a
restaurant because they had the audacity to put the silverware in the wrong
spots. I can see where the snootier patrons might somehow be offended and
refuse to go there anymore, or complain to the server or manager or
something equally petty. I just don't consider it, or myself, to be that
important. What IS bad netiquette-and I can see the reason why, even though
I'm guilty of it right now-is posting off topic. Yet, ironically, the one
who started the off topic posting is the one complaining about netiquette.
Also, by implying that top posters are lazy, he's indirectly confirmed that
top posting is easier.

I also preferred the way I could sort threads with Netscape, but that
software has caused problems with my computer, so I removed it and deal with
some minor inconveniences in OE, but that also seems to somehow be a
violation of etiquette, or just some reason to make me somehow inferior to
those who use other readers.

I don't mean to prolong this thread, but I'm really trying to understand how
anybody can get their panties in such a bunch over something so trivial and
so much a matter of personal preference.

And if my plane wasn't getting its annual right now, I wouldn't even be
participating in this NG because of these types of arguments or
debates-both, I guess since some is debate and some is just argumentative.

If you prefer bottom posting, by all means go right ahead. I prefer sending
and receiving top posts, unless I'm responding to particular pieces of a
post, in which case I post my response below each particular piece. On most
posts I can rather easily tell what's being responded to, but if there's any
confusion I know I can scroll down to clear it up.

I also don't mind some people not trimming their posts as I don't always get
the original post if I come in late. Then I look for a post that hasn't been
snipped to get caught up. And they certainly don't seem to take up any more
time or space than snipped posts. I wouldn't want them all like that, but I
find a few to be helpful. Yet that is almost a capital crime to some folks.

Is there an Emily Post of the internet? If so, does she have a rationale for
all the rules of netiquette? Are some arbitrary? Traditional? Practical?

I don't really NEED to know. Just trying to make sense of something that
seems to me to be pure nonsense coming from otherwise very sensible people.

mike regish



"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 30 May 2004 00:31:14 GMT, wrote:

I HATE scrolling down to read the latest...


it is a free world.
do whatever you want but don't start crying when top posters are not read
by bottom posters (and vice versa).
you have the right to post, but nobody has the duty to read the postings.



  #3  
Old May 30th 04, 05:55 PM
Teacherjh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Ok. I'm going to break my promise to myself again because I'm just
overwhelmingly curious about this. [...] the argument against top
posting seems to be primarily one of etiquette-or
netiquette. To me this is like saying that it's not proper etiquette to fly
a high wing plane (or low wing depending on what you fly).


IMHO top posting and bottom posting each have their uses, as does "nop" posting
(posting a reply which, does not quote anything, but does address points in the
thread). Nop posting works in some situations if the post is self-contained.

Etiquette is based on the idea of making things easy and pleasant for others.
To use the (not very good) airplane analogy, it's more like saying it's not
proper etiquette to fly =passengers= in a low wing plane (because they can't
see down) or in a high wing plane (because it makes them look like sissies* ).
The focus is on the passengers.

Personally, if the post lends itself I like to see a snippet of what is being
replied to before I see the reply to that point, and then to see the next
snippet before the reply to =it=. I do not want to see a whole slug first, and
it annoys me to have to scroll down the entire post before I get to the
original material. I often skip those (they are often followed by "me too" or
by comments whose reltionship to the post requires me to go back and find
specific things there.

Posts come to servers way out of order, so the context is often needed.

However, there are some threads in which the context is evident from the
original material, or where the posts tend to be presented in order to most
readers. In those cases, posting the reply first, and then the post being
replied to for reference =just in case= it's needed, works best for most.

However, on USENET, everyone is an expert whose Exalted Opinions (tm) must be
followed by fiat. When this doesn't happen, sixteen million rulers come down
on somebody's knuckles, in the name of kindness.

Jose
* well, I had to think of something!


--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)
  #4  
Old May 30th 04, 06:15 PM
Windecks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Notice the top post...

This whole debate reminds me of the ****wit who years ago told me my long
email was a waste of precious net bandwidth, and merited some form of
corporal punishment. There's nothing like righteous indignation on trivial
matters to make one wonder how some people's brains actually work.

USENET is free. It's a nice way to share thoughts on topics of common
interest. If you don't like the way a particular post looks, DON"T READ
IT!!!

"mike regish" wrote in message
news:l4ouc.19595$eY2.15166@attbi_s02...
Ok. I'm going to break my promise to myself again because I'm just
overwhelmingly curious about this.

I've stated a reason why top posting is a personal preference of mine. But
the argument against top posting seems to be primarily one of etiquette-or
netiquette. To me this is like saying that it's not proper etiquette to

fly
a high wing plane (or low wing depending on what you fly). I read them
all-top or bottom. I just prefer top. I prefer a high wing because I like

to
look down and I like to take pictures. I have absolutely nothing against
people who fly low wings. I'm sure they have their reasons for that
particular preference. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. I
prefer top posting because I like to go from message to message with the
arrow keys rather than the mouse when I can. Normal etiquette has to do

with
things like where the forks and knives go in a dinner setting. I can find
them as long as they're somewhere on the table. I don't care where you put
them, but in formal setting there is a "right" side and a "wrong" side,
according to etiquette. Again, I'm not going to stop patronizing a
restaurant because they had the audacity to put the silverware in the

wrong
spots. I can see where the snootier patrons might somehow be offended and
refuse to go there anymore, or complain to the server or manager or
something equally petty. I just don't consider it, or myself, to be that
important. What IS bad netiquette-and I can see the reason why, even

though
I'm guilty of it right now-is posting off topic. Yet, ironically, the one
who started the off topic posting is the one complaining about netiquette.
Also, by implying that top posters are lazy, he's indirectly confirmed

that
top posting is easier.

I also preferred the way I could sort threads with Netscape, but that
software has caused problems with my computer, so I removed it and deal

with
some minor inconveniences in OE, but that also seems to somehow be a
violation of etiquette, or just some reason to make me somehow inferior to
those who use other readers.

I don't mean to prolong this thread, but I'm really trying to understand

how
anybody can get their panties in such a bunch over something so trivial

and
so much a matter of personal preference.

And if my plane wasn't getting its annual right now, I wouldn't even be
participating in this NG because of these types of arguments or
debates-both, I guess since some is debate and some is just argumentative.

If you prefer bottom posting, by all means go right ahead. I prefer

sending
and receiving top posts, unless I'm responding to particular pieces of a
post, in which case I post my response below each particular piece. On

most
posts I can rather easily tell what's being responded to, but if there's

any
confusion I know I can scroll down to clear it up.

I also don't mind some people not trimming their posts as I don't always

get
the original post if I come in late. Then I look for a post that hasn't

been
snipped to get caught up. And they certainly don't seem to take up any

more
time or space than snipped posts. I wouldn't want them all like that, but

I
find a few to be helpful. Yet that is almost a capital crime to some

folks.

Is there an Emily Post of the internet? If so, does she have a rationale

for
all the rules of netiquette? Are some arbitrary? Traditional? Practical?

I don't really NEED to know. Just trying to make sense of something that
seems to me to be pure nonsense coming from otherwise very sensible

people.

mike regish



"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 30 May 2004 00:31:14 GMT, wrote:

I HATE scrolling down to read the latest...


it is a free world.
do whatever you want but don't start crying when top posters are not

read
by bottom posters (and vice versa).
you have the right to post, but nobody has the duty to read the

postings.





  #5  
Old May 30th 04, 06:28 PM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Windecks" wrote in message
om...
[...]
USENET is free.


If you think Usenet, or the associated bandwidth and storage costs, is free,
you are a "****wit" yourself.


  #6  
Old May 30th 04, 06:58 PM
mike regish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

OK. Maybe not "free", but included in the price.

mike regish

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Windecks" wrote in message
om...
[...]
USENET is free.


If you think Usenet, or the associated bandwidth and storage costs, is

free,
you are a "****wit" yourself.




  #7  
Old May 30th 04, 10:35 PM
Martin Hotze
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 30 May 2004 17:58:42 GMT, mike regish wrote:

OK. Maybe not "free", but included in the price.


a good one.
do you know how many ISPs stopped providing usenet?
many ISPs have newsservers because there are people working in the IT
department who care.

mike regish


#m


[...]
USENET is free.


If you think Usenet, or the associated bandwidth and storage costs, is

free,
you are a "****wit" yourself.




--
Martin!!! Maaaaartiiiin!!! Can you please flame this guy for me?
'HECTOP' in rec.aviation.piloting
  #8  
Old May 31st 04, 02:25 AM
mike regish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wow. What a mess this one is. No caps. Junk left at the bottom. Sig line
from a relative relic in this thread. My name below your response. Yeesh.

And, no I don't know how many ISPs have stopped providing usenet. Don't see
what the storage problem is with regular file dumping. Bless their caring
hearts.

I would think spam would be a whole lot more egregious and deserving of your
wrath than a few extra lines, or lines not where you like them in usenet. It
certainly wastes a much larger amount of bandwidth.

mike (entire post left intact for a reason) regish


"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 May 2004 17:58:42 GMT, mike regish wrote:

OK. Maybe not "free", but included in the price.


a good one.
do you know how many ISPs stopped providing usenet?
many ISPs have newsservers because there are people working in the IT
department who care.

mike regish


#m


[...]
USENET is free.

If you think Usenet, or the associated bandwidth and storage costs, is

free,
you are a "****wit" yourself.




--
Martin!!! Maaaaartiiiin!!! Can you please flame this guy for me?
'HECTOP' in rec.aviation.piloting



  #9  
Old May 30th 04, 10:33 PM
Martin Hotze
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 30 May 2004 16:36:33 GMT, mike regish wrote:

Ok. I'm going to break my promise to myself again because I'm just
overwhelmingly curious about this.


well, I had to scroll down and read what and whom you are referring to.
then I scrolled back up to read your post.

I've stated a reason why top posting is a personal preference of mine. But


well, live with it. it is ok for me. but it is also ok for me to adjust the
score. well, I am not a factor here, but you get the idea.

the argument against top posting seems to be primarily one of etiquette-or
netiquette. To me this is like saying that it's not proper etiquette to fly


nah. it is how things are read. from top the way down to the end.

(...)
I also preferred the way I could sort threads with Netscape, but that
software has caused problems with my computer, so I removed it and deal with
some minor inconveniences in OE, but that also seems to somehow be a
violation of etiquette, or just some reason to make me somehow inferior to
those who use other readers.


everybody gets what he deserves.

(...)
I also don't mind some people not trimming their posts as I don't always get
the original post if I come in late. Then I look for a post that hasn't been


heck. don't you think that pictures would be nice to be attached to
postings? it would explain so much.
where is the border? what is ok and what not?

Is there an Emily Post of the internet? If so, does she have a rationale for
all the rules of netiquette? Are some arbitrary? Traditional? Practical?


most of the rules (netiquette for the net, etiquette for real life) come
out of practice.

I don't really NEED to know. Just trying to make sense of something that
seems to me to be pure nonsense coming from otherwise very sensible people.

mike regish

( ... fullquote snipped ....)

#m

--
Martin!!! Maaaaartiiiin!!! Can you please flame this guy for me?
'HECTOP' in rec.aviation.piloting
  #10  
Old May 31st 04, 02:34 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Interspersed post follows...

On Sun, 30 May 2004 14:22:57 GMT, Martin Hotze gov
wrote:

I HATE scrolling down to read the latest...


it is a free world.
do whatever you want but don't start crying when top posters are not read
by bottom posters (and vice versa).
you have the right to post, but nobody has the duty to read the postings.



Hehe... I've not shed a tear on usenet , nor in FIDO before
it...
I doubt many read my postings, but I post in case someone may.
If they don't wish to read my post because it is readily found as
soon as they open it (on top) that's OK...

I read the posts/threads that interest me, (top or bottom) , I
can't even IMAGINE anyone not reading a post that interests them
just because it is on the top..... but , I guess there are all kinds
here...

Remember when we used paper files? The MOST RECENT info was
placed on top, and when you file e-mail, the MOST RECENT is at the


that email replies are put on top is due to the sick clients from one
bigger company.


Medication at the ready.... (I think I will be OK....)

top... newspapers in the library, MOST RECENT on top...invoices?
same.....calendars ? ...same....


and books? you expect the end of each page on top of the page?
if you want to put an analogy to real life then books or sheets of paper
are IMNSHO the best.


Nope, never mentioned books, - they are usually a continuous
story by one author, not separate events sequentially written by
separate people.. I would consider books very different from usnet
and a poor comparison as they are intended for a different purpose...
.....

And now we are supposed to place our MOST RECENT "news"
all the way on the BOTTOM????


it is threading. you know? na. probably not.


Guess not, but it still works for me...


Cheers! Thanks for your reply

Dave

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NTSB: USAF included? Larry Dighera Piloting 10 September 11th 05 10:33 AM
Pilot deviations and a new FAA reality Chip Jones Instrument Flight Rules 36 October 14th 04 06:10 PM
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep C J Campbell Instrument Flight Rules 117 July 22nd 04 05:40 PM
Pilot Error? Is it Mr. Damron? Badwater Bill Home Built 3 June 23rd 04 04:05 PM
Student Pilot equipment John Stevens Piloting 31 May 31st 04 03:04 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.