>"Jukka Aho" wrote in message
>news:bidJ9.1305$U25.454722@reader1.news.jippii.net...
>> Dom Hogan wrote:

>> > I'm darned if I can find a setting in OE6 for defaulting to
>> > bottom posting/replying. Anyone, please? :-).

>> There is none. However, the fact that OE puts cursor blinking on
>> the first line of the quoted message is not in itself a wrong
>> practice. After all, the first line is where you should logically
>> start trimming the quotes, and subdividing the quoted material to
>> sections under which you write your comments and answers, in a
>> logical conversational order.
[...]
>> There are lots of good reasons to a) trim your quotes to the bare
>> minimum that is needed to understand the context and b) represent
>> your quotes and your answers in a logical order (first the question,
>> then the answer to it.) Some of them can be found at Timo Salmi's
>> introduction to quoting at
>> and in the subsequent links at the bottom of that article.

I heartily agree with the above, though I don't care
which way it goes in a thread - either up, or down, but
the sequence should be consistent in the thread, with
the exception of comments placed within the quoted text
for clarity, as with this one...;-)
In addition, I use "[...]" or "" to indicate
edits. Having been often "misquoted" by having important
parts deleted, altering the meaning of what I've said, I
prefer to see when someone may have done the same to
others...;-)
I also heartily dislike wading through 50% HTML "junk"
in a text NG to try to find the "kernal o' wisdom"
possibly included there...;-)

>> --
>> A: Top posters.
>> Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

A good one! ;-)

[the top-posted quote below has been edited for proper
order in this thread...]
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 06:11:15 GMT, "Dick M." wrote:

>I hate having to scroll to the bottom to see the new message.
>In fact, most of the time I just give up and go on to another
>post rather that waste time scrolling down.

Whew! And I thought I was lazy...!!! ;-)

>If you need to
>read other stuff about this thread, you are welcome to read
>further (I'd rather just delete the rest, but some people seem
>unable to locate the rest of the thread by themselves).
>Dick

Sometimes the response gets separated from the
thread (one prolific poster here causes this
often...), leaving the response a mysterious
"utterance from the ether", with no context,
or it initiates a needless "off-spring"
sub-thread...;-) Or, to paraphrase JA,

>> --
>> A: Top posters.

;-)