--- "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <lots of snippage before this post> > >> The difference between now and WWII is that such > >> people would not be > >> allowed to commit similar errors 12 years later, > >> like...... attacking in > >> 180 degrees the wrong direction.
[I wrote:] > >When I see something in quotes, I expect it to be > >*exactly* what the person said/wrote; if words are > >left out, I expect to see '<snip>' or '...' (as you > >did above: <<...similar errors 12 years later, > >> like...... attacking in > >> 180 degrees the wrong direction>> ) <snippage> > > > Huh? > > The only words I dropped were in a non-essential > dependent clause, and I > clearly indicated the snippage through the use of > the ellipse. My > understanding is that use of the "ellipse" (i.e. the > "...") I made above is > kosher enough to be used in the NY Times Style > Handbook. > > I must honestly say that I have no idea what you are > complaining about. Very well. On Wed Apr 2 23:55:48 PST 2003, you wrote: >>Out of curiosity, how do you reconcile this previous fear of yours with your suggestion that we should, "be attacking Riyadh?"<< In my post of Wed Apr 2 22:35:51 PST 2003, same thread: >>Brin Calls for an Attack on Riyadh Re: Brin: David Frum on the War Plans<< : [you said] >> Dr Brin, you have previously indicated to this List > that you consider a > major risk from this war the possibility of > inflaming ordinary Mulsims and > Arabs against us. Out of curiosity, how do you > reconcile this previous > fear of yours with your suggestion that we should, > "be attacking Riyadh?" [I replied] *Technical point* Your quote was NOT what he said! << The phrase "be attacking Riyadh?" was *not* a quote from Himself as those exact words *were not* written, at least on-list. Hence my "technical point" that an extrapolation, assumption, or condensation of another's words should not be *quoted,* but should be otherwise marked; I gave as a _correct_ example the way you wrote the first sentence in this post. Had you written something like: >>By "attacking in 180 degrees the wrong direction," do you suggest that we should *be attacking Riyadh?*<< that would have correctly quoted DB and also conveyed your interpretation of his position. But [as I said previously] > >Combining words without showing that there was a > >discontinuity is like combining 2 pictures without > >stating "Edited for composition" or something to > that effect. I really don't believe that you are so obtuse... **TAG!** ;) Debbi who notes that I apparently replied to JDG's post before it was sent! What's up with the weird time stamps? __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
