Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

> And then scroll back up if the answer is interleaved? Why make life so

> difficult? Just because Fred Flintstone did it that way?

 

Since you deleted the important context, I need to reconstruct this:

 

First, I made this remark:

 

Contextualized inline posting, using generous snipping without cutting

away too much "story" is the easiest type of post to follow. It may

take a few more seconds to post this way, but the dividends are

certainly worth the tiny effort.

 

Oh, and in my newsreader (OE along with OE QuoteFix), scrolling is

easily accomplished by pressing the space bar.

 

Then you responded:

 

Scrolling is easy enough. I just choose not to want to do it in order to

read every post..

 

Then TerryR said:

 

Shouldn't have to scroll at all (except for interspersed replies). Click

on the message pane and press End. Or doesn't your newsreader work that

way?

 

To which you answered:

> And then scroll back up if the answer is interleaved? Why make life so

> difficult? Just because Fred Flintstone did it that way?

 

By snipping everything relevant, you have made it pretty difficult to

follow this thread. I doubt very much this was your intention, but that

is the effect.

 

Anyway, I'm not quite sure I get your point. We're talking about reading

a post. There should never be any reason to scroll back up again, even

with interleaving. Take this post, for instance. I started on the fifth

line. When it's time to scroll down in order to continue reading, the

space bar does the trick. Just read the normal way, from the top of the

page to the bottom. If anything, this makes life *easier*!

> It amuses me that the issue of whether one should top or bottom post

> ALWAYS comes up after a troll has lost arguments over Vista or

> anything Microsoft. In most cases, the troll will start another post,

> but now and again, it is used as a last ditch snipe.

 

Don't you think ALWAYS is just a bit of an exaggeration? ;-)

> To get people to co-operate, one has to be nice about it.

> Unfortunately, trolls have been slinging insults and name calling,

> not only to those who try to help, but to newbies and others with

> problems too.

 

I hope people perceive me as being nice. I don't recall slinging insults

or calling people names.

> I could take issue with the top line which appears in all of your

> posts, but I don't. I let it go.

 

But you snipped it!

 

For the benefit of others, TerryR's top line was:

 

On 12/16/2007 4:45 AM On a whim, Mike Hall - MVP pounded out on the

keyboard

 

Why would anyone take issue with that? Opening lines like that are just

as much a tradition on Usenet as signatures. It wasn't directed to you,

specifically; it's a universal, tongue-in-cheek attribution.

On 12/17/2007 2:42 PM On a whim, Daave pounded out on the keyboard

> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

>> There is a lot of talk about not seeing stuff and yet all of my top

>> posts have been seen. The only difference is that there is not a lot

>> of crap above or below. Or is there?

>>

>> Mike Hall - MVP

>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

>

>

> I noticed you stopped using the delimiter, Mike. Thanks! :-)

>

> The talk was not about whether or not your posts have been seen but

> rather about the consequences of replying to a top-posted message which

> happens to include a delimiter. Now that you have altered how you post

> (thanks again), replying to your posts can preserve whatever the new

> poster deems is necessary.

>

> I can't vouch for other newsreaders, but when using OE w/ QuoteFix,

> Control+Z comes in handy whenever replying to a top-posted message which

> contains a delimiter.

>

>

 

Don't hold your breath. He just did it for one post.

 

--

Terry R.

 

***Reply Note***

Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.

Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

On 12/17/2007 3:02 PM On a whim, Daave pounded out on the keyboard

> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

>> And then scroll back up if the answer is interleaved? Why make life so

>> difficult? Just because Fred Flintstone did it that way?

>

> Since you deleted the important context, I need to reconstruct this:

>

> First, I made this remark:

>

> Contextualized inline posting, using generous snipping without cutting

> away too much "story" is the easiest type of post to follow. It may

> take a few more seconds to post this way, but the dividends are

> certainly worth the tiny effort.

>

> Oh, and in my newsreader (OE along with OE QuoteFix), scrolling is

> easily accomplished by pressing the space bar.

>

> Then you responded:

>

> Scrolling is easy enough. I just choose not to want to do it in order to

> read every post..

>

> Then TerryR said:

>

> Shouldn't have to scroll at all (except for interspersed replies). Click

> on the message pane and press End. Or doesn't your newsreader work that

> way?

>

> To which you answered:

>

>> And then scroll back up if the answer is interleaved? Why make life so

>> difficult? Just because Fred Flintstone did it that way?

>

> By snipping everything relevant, you have made it pretty difficult to

> follow this thread. I doubt very much this was your intention, but that

> is the effect.

>

> Anyway, I'm not quite sure I get your point. We're talking about reading

> a post. There should never be any reason to scroll back up again, even

> with interleaving. Take this post, for instance. I started on the fifth

> line. When it's time to scroll down in order to continue reading, the

> space bar does the trick. Just read the normal way, from the top of the

> page to the bottom. If anything, this makes life *easier*!

>

>> It amuses me that the issue of whether one should top or bottom post

>> ALWAYS comes up after a troll has lost arguments over Vista or

>> anything Microsoft. In most cases, the troll will start another post,

>> but now and again, it is used as a last ditch snipe.

>

> Don't you think ALWAYS is just a bit of an exaggeration? ;-)

>

>> To get people to co-operate, one has to be nice about it.

>> Unfortunately, trolls have been slinging insults and name calling,

>> not only to those who try to help, but to newbies and others with

>> problems too.

>

> I hope people perceive me as being nice. I don't recall slinging insults

> or calling people names.

>

>> I could take issue with the top line which appears in all of your

>> posts, but I don't. I let it go.

>

> But you snipped it!

>

> For the benefit of others, TerryR's top line was:

>

> On 12/16/2007 4:45 AM On a whim, Mike Hall - MVP pounded out on the

> keyboard

>

> Why would anyone take issue with that? Opening lines like that are just

> as much a tradition on Usenet as signatures. It wasn't directed to you,

> specifically; it's a universal, tongue-in-cheek attribution.

>

>

 

I couldn't tell if he was referring to my header line or someone else.

If he took any offense to that, the delimiter thing is the least of his

issues.

 

--

Terry R.

 

***Reply Note***

Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.

Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

Terry R. wrote:

> On 12/17/2007 2:42 PM On a whim, Daave pounded out on the keyboard

>

>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

>>> There is a lot of talk about not seeing stuff and yet all of my top

>>> posts have been seen. The only difference is that there is not a lot

>>> of crap above or below. Or is there?

>>>

>>> Mike Hall - MVP

>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

>>

>>

>> I noticed you stopped using the delimiter, Mike. Thanks! :-)

>>

>> The talk was not about whether or not your posts have been seen but

>> rather about the consequences of replying to a top-posted message

>> which happens to include a delimiter. Now that you have altered how

>> you post (thanks again), replying to your posts can preserve

>> whatever the new poster deems is necessary.

>>

>> I can't vouch for other newsreaders, but when using OE w/ QuoteFix,

>> Control+Z comes in handy whenever replying to a top-posted message

>> which contains a delimiter.

>>

>>

>

> Don't hold your breath. He just did it for one post.

 

Hope springs eternal!

Terry R. wrote:

> On 12/17/2007 3:02 PM On a whim, Daave pounded out on the keyboard

>

>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

>>> And then scroll back up if the answer is interleaved? Why make life

>>> so difficult? Just because Fred Flintstone did it that way?

>>

>> Since you deleted the important context, I need to reconstruct this:

>>

>> First, I made this remark:

>>

>> Contextualized inline posting, using generous snipping without

>> cutting away too much "story" is the easiest type of post to follow.

>> It may take a few more seconds to post this way, but the dividends

>> are certainly worth the tiny effort.

>>

>> Oh, and in my newsreader (OE along with OE QuoteFix), scrolling is

>> easily accomplished by pressing the space bar.

>>

>> Then you responded:

>>

>> Scrolling is easy enough. I just choose not to want to do it in

>> order to read every post..

>>

>> Then TerryR said:

>>

>> Shouldn't have to scroll at all (except for interspersed replies).

>> Click on the message pane and press End. Or doesn't your newsreader

>> work that way?

>>

>> To which you answered:

>>

>>> And then scroll back up if the answer is interleaved? Why make life

>>> so difficult? Just because Fred Flintstone did it that way?

>>

>> By snipping everything relevant, you have made it pretty difficult to

>> follow this thread. I doubt very much this was your intention, but

>> that is the effect.

>>

>> Anyway, I'm not quite sure I get your point. We're talking about

>> reading a post. There should never be any reason to scroll back up

>> again, even with interleaving. Take this post, for instance. I

>> started on the fifth line. When it's time to scroll down in order to

>> continue reading, the space bar does the trick. Just read the normal

>> way, from the top of the page to the bottom. If anything, this makes

>> life *easier*!

>>

>>> It amuses me that the issue of whether one should top or bottom post

>>> ALWAYS comes up after a troll has lost arguments over Vista or

>>> anything Microsoft. In most cases, the troll will start another

>>> post, but now and again, it is used as a last ditch snipe.

>>

>> Don't you think ALWAYS is just a bit of an exaggeration? ;-)

>>

>>> To get people to co-operate, one has to be nice about it.

>>> Unfortunately, trolls have been slinging insults and name calling,

>>> not only to those who try to help, but to newbies and others with

>>> problems too.

>>

>> I hope people perceive me as being nice. I don't recall slinging

>> insults or calling people names.

>>

>>> I could take issue with the top line which appears in all of your

>>> posts, but I don't. I let it go.

>>

>> But you snipped it!

>>

>> For the benefit of others, TerryR's top line was:

>>

>> On 12/16/2007 4:45 AM On a whim, Mike Hall - MVP pounded out on the

>> keyboard

>>

>> Why would anyone take issue with that? Opening lines like that are

>> just as much a tradition on Usenet as signatures. It wasn't directed

>> to you, specifically; it's a universal, tongue-in-cheek attribution.

>>

>>

>

> I couldn't tell if he was referring to my header line or someone else.

> If he took any offense to that, the delimiter thing is the least of

> his issues.

 

He was replying to your post. But since he snipped the actual line, no

one (including yourself) knows what he's talking about unless they go

out of their way to reconstruct the thread. I did it that time to

demonstrate my point, but it's not something I plan on getting in the

habit of doing!

 

And I was also perplexed as to why that might have been in the least way

offensive.

"WaIIy" <WaIIy@(nft).invalid> wrote in message

news:9qudm3pusudni6vl6fpt6stte54ot24brc@4ax.com...

> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:57:49 -0800, "Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com>

> wrote:

>

>>On 12/16/2007 4:45 AM On a whim, Mike Hall - MVP pounded out on the

>>keyboard

>>

>>> Dave

>>>

>>> Scrolling is easy enough. I just choose not to want to do it in order to

>>> read every post..

>>>

>>

>>Shouldn't have to scroll at all (except for interspersed replies). Click

>>on the message pane and press End. Or doesn't your newsreader work that

>>way?

>

> I guess I'm confused. How many posts are so long you have to scroll ?

>

> This is ludicrous.

 

 

 

Single posts are not too long in themselves but bottom posters have a bad

habit of leaving a great deal of crap above the reply which requires

scrolling down. If one doesn't scroll, interleaved postings get missed

entirely.

 

As a result, long, meaningless runs of threads as per this one become really

quite tiresome.

 

Also, my newsreader doesn't miss top or bottom posts, and I do my best to

accommodate all without whining about it..

 

 

--

Mike Hall - MVP

http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

"Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> wrote in message

news:e2PXQJOQIHA.5184@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> And then scroll back up if the answer is interleaved? Why make life so

> difficult? Just because Fred Flintstone did it that way?

>

> It amuses me that the issue of whether one should top or bottom post

> ALWAYS comes up after a troll has lost arguments over Vista or anything

> Microsoft. In most cases, the troll will start another post, but now and

> again, it is used as a last ditch snipe.

>

> To get people to co-operate, one has to be nice about it. Unfortunately,

> trolls have been slinging insults and name calling, not only to those who

> try to help, but to newbies and others with problems too.

>

> I could take issue with the top line which appears in all of your posts,

> but I don't. I let it go. Yours is not as bad as some I have seen, and one

> of the many reasons I quit the alt.os groups was because of the sneering

> attitudes and lack of decency showed by some there.

>

> --

> Mike Hall - MVP

> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

>

 

What i don't understand, is the need for others to make someone conform to

their standards of usernet posting. if it bothers you so much don't read

their post's or kill file them..................

In article <uTBTItRQIHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, mikehall@mvps.com

says...

> Single posts are not too long in themselves but bottom posters have a bad

> habit of leaving a great deal of crap above the reply which requires

> scrolling down. If one doesn't scroll, interleaved postings get missed

> entirely.

>

> As a result, long, meaningless runs of threads as per this one become really

> quite tiresome.

>

> Also, my newsreader doesn't miss top or bottom posts, and I do my best to

> accommodate all without whining about it..

 

Did you know that most quality, designed for Usenet, commonly snip

quoted text at 50 lines or about that? That's the difference between

using an email client for Usenet and using a Usenet client.

 

 

--

 

Leythos

- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a

drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"

spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

In article <ubjObQSQIHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>, tip1@hotmail.com

says...

>

> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> wrote in message

> news:e2PXQJOQIHA.5184@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> > And then scroll back up if the answer is interleaved? Why make life so

> > difficult? Just because Fred Flintstone did it that way?

> >

> > It amuses me that the issue of whether one should top or bottom post

> > ALWAYS comes up after a troll has lost arguments over Vista or anything

> > Microsoft. In most cases, the troll will start another post, but now and

> > again, it is used as a last ditch snipe.

> >

> > To get people to co-operate, one has to be nice about it. Unfortunately,

> > trolls have been slinging insults and name calling, not only to those who

> > try to help, but to newbies and others with problems too.

> >

> > I could take issue with the top line which appears in all of your posts,

> > but I don't. I let it go. Yours is not as bad as some I have seen, and one

> > of the many reasons I quit the alt.os groups was because of the sneering

> > attitudes and lack of decency showed by some there.

> >

> > --

> > Mike Hall - MVP

> > http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

> >

>

> What i don't understand, is the need for others to make someone conform to

> their standards of usernet posting. if it bothers you so much don't read

> their post's or kill file them..................

 

How about if we could just get people to use Usenet clients that

understood Usenet posts - yours is broken, it didn't snip the signature

of Mike's message when you replied, I left it there to show you.

 

--

 

Leythos

- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a

drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"

spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

On 12/17/2007 7:52 PM On a whim, Leythos pounded out on the keyboard

> In article <ubjObQSQIHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>, tip1@hotmail.com

> says...

>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> wrote in message

>> news:e2PXQJOQIHA.5184@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>> And then scroll back up if the answer is interleaved? Why make life so

>>> difficult? Just because Fred Flintstone did it that way?

>>>

>>> It amuses me that the issue of whether one should top or bottom post

>>> ALWAYS comes up after a troll has lost arguments over Vista or anything

>>> Microsoft. In most cases, the troll will start another post, but now and

>>> again, it is used as a last ditch snipe.

>>>

>>> To get people to co-operate, one has to be nice about it. Unfortunately,

>>> trolls have been slinging insults and name calling, not only to those who

>>> try to help, but to newbies and others with problems too.

>>>

>>> I could take issue with the top line which appears in all of your posts,

>>> but I don't. I let it go. Yours is not as bad as some I have seen, and one

>>> of the many reasons I quit the alt.os groups was because of the sneering

>>> attitudes and lack of decency showed by some there.

>>>

>>> --

>>> Mike Hall - MVP

>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

>>>

>> What i don't understand, is the need for others to make someone conform to

>> their standards of usernet posting. if it bothers you so much don't read

>> their post's or kill file them..................

>

> How about if we could just get people to use Usenet clients that

> understood Usenet posts - yours is broken, it didn't snip the signature

> of Mike's message when you replied, I left it there to show you.

>

 

Because he's using the same client as the offenders...should we be

surprised? That's why MS isn't concerned about a top post using a

delimiter, because MS clients ignore the delimiter altogether.

 

--

Terry R.

 

***Reply Note***

Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.

Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:51:01 -0500, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:

>In article <uTBTItRQIHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, mikehall@mvps.com

>says...

>> Single posts are not too long in themselves but bottom posters have a bad

>> habit of leaving a great deal of crap above the reply which requires

>> scrolling down. If one doesn't scroll, interleaved postings get missed

>> entirely.

>>

>> As a result, long, meaningless runs of threads as per this one become really

>> quite tiresome.

>>

>> Also, my newsreader doesn't miss top or bottom posts, and I do my best to

>> accommodate all without whining about it..

>

>Did you know that most quality, designed for Usenet, commonly snip

>quoted text at 50 lines or about that? That's the difference between

>using an email client for Usenet and using a Usenet client.

 

Leythos, you're (we're) pissing in the wind, here.

 

I suspect it's the "I'll do whatever the hell I want and you can live

with the fallout. If you don't like it, tough" attitude that's so

prevalent today.

 

Perhaps it's the God complex that is attached to being an MVP, I don't

know. Some people run more on emotion than logic and some have

flashbacks to when they were picked last for the third grade dodge ball

game. Maybe it's the puffery that's allowed due to Usenet.

 

I don't know.

 

Disclaimer -

The vast majority of Microsoft MVPs are extraordinarily

helpful and their time and expertise is appreciated by

many, including me.

In article <93qem39b1o2fql1rls8co3fo3f5hqj7q5p@4ax.com>, WaIIy@

(nft).invalid says...

> I suspect it's the "I'll do whatever the hell I want and you can live

> with the fallout. If you don't like it, tough" attitude that's so

> prevalent today.

>

> Perhaps it's the God complex that is attached to being an MVP, I don't

> know. Some people run more on emotion than logic and some have

> flashbacks to when they were picked last for the third grade dodge ball

> game. Maybe it's the puffery that's allowed due to Usenet.

 

Yea, I've seen it many times, a person believes they are more important

than the standards and believes that if they can do something, that it

must be intended to be a that way, even when it makes no sense.

 

--

 

Leythos

- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a

drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"

spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message

news:MPG.21d17f28c7d7fa1b989917@adfree.Usenet.com...

> In article <93qem39b1o2fql1rls8co3fo3f5hqj7q5p@4ax.com>, WaIIy@

> (nft).invalid says...

>> I suspect it's the "I'll do whatever the hell I want and you can live

>> with the fallout. If you don't like it, tough" attitude that's so

>> prevalent today.

>>

>> Perhaps it's the God complex that is attached to being an MVP, I don't

>> know. Some people run more on emotion than logic and some have

>> flashbacks to when they were picked last for the third grade dodge ball

>> game. Maybe it's the puffery that's allowed due to Usenet.

>

> Yea, I've seen it many times, a person believes they are more important

> than the standards and believes that if they can do something, that it

> must be intended to be a that way, even when it makes no sense.

>

> --

>

> Leythos

> - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

> - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a

> drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"

> spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

 

 

 

Which is how I see it notwithstanding aging standards. It has nothing to do

with being an MVP

 

Maybe some of the whiners should quit it with the snipes. They may just find

that others are more amenable to what they are saying..

 

--

Mike Hall - MVP

http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:04:20 -0500, "Mike Hall - MVP"

<mikehall@mvps.com> wrote:

>"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message

>news:MPG.21d17f28c7d7fa1b989917@adfree.Usenet.com...

>> In article <93qem39b1o2fql1rls8co3fo3f5hqj7q5p@4ax.com>, WaIIy@

>> (nft).invalid says...

>>> I suspect it's the "I'll do whatever the hell I want and you can live

>>> with the fallout. If you don't like it, tough" attitude that's so

>>> prevalent today.

>>>

>>> Perhaps it's the God complex that is attached to being an MVP, I don't

>>> know. Some people run more on emotion than logic and some have

>>> flashbacks to when they were picked last for the third grade dodge ball

>>> game. Maybe it's the puffery that's allowed due to Usenet.

>>

>> Yea, I've seen it many times, a person believes they are more important

>> than the standards and believes that if they can do something, that it

>> must be intended to be a that way, even when it makes no sense.

>>

>> --

>>

>> Leythos

>> - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

>> - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a

>> drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"

>> spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

>

>

>

>Which is how I see it notwithstanding aging standards. It has nothing to do

>with being an MVP

 

Being an MVP may or may not be a factor. You can't speak for all MVPs.

>Maybe some of the whiners should quit it with the snipes. They may just find

>that others are more amenable to what they are saying..

 

Now it comes down to 'feelings'.

 

Since you can't logically address the issues, you become an arbiter of

standards and also that which you attempt to mock.

On 12/18/2007 6:04 AM On a whim, Mike Hall - MVP pounded out on the keyboard

> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message

> news:MPG.21d17f28c7d7fa1b989917@adfree.Usenet.com...

>> In article <93qem39b1o2fql1rls8co3fo3f5hqj7q5p@4ax.com>, WaIIy@

>> (nft).invalid says...

>>> I suspect it's the "I'll do whatever the hell I want and you can live

>>> with the fallout. If you don't like it, tough" attitude that's so

>>> prevalent today.

>>>

>>> Perhaps it's the God complex that is attached to being an MVP, I don't

>>> know. Some people run more on emotion than logic and some have

>>> flashbacks to when they were picked last for the third grade dodge ball

>>> game. Maybe it's the puffery that's allowed due to Usenet.

>> Yea, I've seen it many times, a person believes they are more important

>> than the standards and believes that if they can do something, that it

>> must be intended to be a that way, even when it makes no sense.

>>

>> --

>>

>> Leythos

>> - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

>> - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a

>> drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"

>> spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

>

>

>

> Which is how I see it notwithstanding aging standards. It has nothing to do

> with being an MVP

>

> Maybe some of the whiners should quit it with the snipes. They may just find

> that others are more amenable to what they are saying..

>

 

But here is a perfect example, you have to admit that the newsreader you

are using FAILED to remove the delimiter and the sig below it when you

replied to Lethos. THIS is the point we have been trying to make. The

MS mail/news clients are broken. My client (Thunderbird), properly

removed your delimiter and sig, which is the correct thing to do. And

when a client does it CORRECTLY, the clients that add the delimiter

INCORRECTLY when top posting, will remove everything below the

delimiter, something they were designed to do.

 

Why is it only the ones using the broken clients defend a flaw that is

so clearly evident? We're not blasting you directly, but only your (and

others) failure to see how most newsreaders work, and fix it so we can

"all get along".

 

--

Terry R.

 

***Reply Note***

Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.

Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

Terry

 

You are in the wrong here.

 

--

Peter

 

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others

Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

 

"Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com> wrote in message news:%

>But here is a perfect example, you have to admit that the newsreader you

>are using FAILED to remove the delimiter and the sig below it when you

>replied to Lethos. THIS is the point we have been trying to make.

So, Are you going to have a duel?

"Peter Foldes" <okf22@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:ejDC0yaQIHA.4128@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

Terry

 

You are in the wrong here.

 

--

Peter

 

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others

Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

 

"Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com> wrote in message news:%

>But here is a perfect example, you have to admit that the newsreader you

>are using FAILED to remove the delimiter and the sig below it when you

>replied to Lethos. THIS is the point we have been trying to make.

On 12/18/2007 11:32 AM On a whim, Peter Foldes pounded out on the keyboard

> Terry

>

> You are in the wrong here.

>

 

Please explain what EVERY newsreader does with a delimiter that NO

Windows mail client does. Please explain why only a Windows mail client

inserts a delimiter when top posting. And then proceed to explain your

comment above, especially since my newsreader knew what to do with the

delimiter in your sig and no Windows mail clients do.

 

Of course no one else can read what I stated, but I'M in the wrong???

 

--

Terry R.

 

***Reply Note***

Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.

Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:32:37 -0500, "Peter Foldes" <okf22@hotmail.com>

wrote:

>Terry

>

>You are in the wrong here.

 

What are you talking about Peter?

 

Your delimiter wiped out everything below your sig.

 

Oh, but *Terry* is wrong.

Wally

 

LOL. It was snipped out by me on purpose. Just like I will do half of what you have posted below . But this time I will mark a point for you to see.

 

That ought to answer you

 

--

Peter

 

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others

Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

 

"WaIIy" <WaIIy@(nft).invalid> wrote in message news:4vlgm35ehvdteb29534nnasnrje9rh91qg@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:32:37 -0500, "Peter Foldes" <okf22@hotmail.com>

> wrote:

>

>>Terry

>>

>>You are in the wrong here.

>

> What are you talking about Peter?

 

The last two lines that you posted to me above is snipped <vbs>

Peter,

 

I can get around your delimiter by highlighting everything and go to

'reply' and edit the post.

 

Kind of defeats the purpose of a delimiter.

 

Remember, almost all apps Except MS apps use the delimiter and act upon

it as it should be used.

 

Well, if you bottom post with a delimiter, it follows accepted

standards.

 

I could see what you had there, I was being a smart ass.

 

You knew that.

 

 

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:53:51 -0500, "Peter Foldes" <okf22@hotmail.com>

wrote:

>Wally

>

>LOL. It was snipped out by me on purpose. Just like I will do half of what you have posted below . But this time I will mark a point for you to see.

>

>That ought to answer you

>

>--

>Peter

>

>Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others

>Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

>

>"WaIIy" <WaIIy@(nft).invalid> wrote in message news:4vlgm35ehvdteb29534nnasnrje9rh91qg@4ax.com...

>> On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:32:37 -0500, "Peter Foldes" <okf22@hotmail.com>

>> wrote:

>>

>>>Terry

>>>

>>>You are in the wrong here.

>>

>> What are you talking about Peter?

>

>The last two lines that you posted to me above is snipped <vbs>

On 12/18/2007 6:53 PM On a whim, Peter Foldes pounded out on the keyboard

> Wally

>

> LOL. It was snipped out by me on purpose. Just like I will do half of what you have posted below . But this time I will mark a point for you to see.

>

> That ought to answer you

>

 

So Peter, after this in depth post, I'm still waiting for your detailed

explanation. You know, the one to my response that was removed because

of your mail client placing a delimiter when you top post.

 

--

Terry R.

 

***Reply Note***

Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.

Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:49:07 -0800, "Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com>

wrote:

>On 12/18/2007 6:53 PM On a whim, Peter Foldes pounded out on the keyboard

>

>> Wally

>>

>> LOL. It was snipped out by me on purpose. Just like I will do half of what you have posted below . But this time I will mark a point for you to see.

>>

>> That ought to answer you

>>

>

>So Peter, after this in depth post, I'm still waiting for your detailed

>explanation. You know, the one to my response that was removed because

>of your mail client placing a delimiter when you top post.

 

Terry, I can't see your sig.

 

It suddenly disappeared when I went to reply.

 

Is it some trick you pulled with your software ?

In article <OX4wkpeQIHA.4684@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>, okf22@hotmail.com

says...

> Wally

>

> LOL. It was snipped out by me on purpose. Just like I will do half of what you have posted below . But this time I will mark a point for you to see.

>

> That ought to answer you

 

In your reply, you violated standards by inserting a sig and then still

posting a reply inline to his quoted text.

 

That's as bad as I've ever seen.

 

--

 

Leythos

- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a

drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"

spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

On 12/19/2007 5:25 AM On a whim, Leythos pounded out on the keyboard

> In article <OX4wkpeQIHA.4684@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>, okf22@hotmail.com

> says...

>> Wally

>>

>> LOL. It was snipped out by me on purpose. Just like I will do half of what you have posted below . But this time I will mark a point for you to see.

>>

>> That ought to answer you

>

> In your reply, you violated standards by inserting a sig and then still

> posting a reply inline to his quoted text.

>

> That's as bad as I've ever seen.

>

 

But he has the nerve to tell ME I'm wrong. ;-) Although he hasn't

substantiated his accusation yet...

 

--

Terry R.

 

***Reply Note***

Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.

Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.