I fixed the larding for you. 8^D
"If you feed a man some lard....
...but if you *teach* a man to lard... "
I don't know what mailtool Nick uses but the style of lardation (my
coinage, rhymes with "tarnation") Nick affects seems just downright
hazardous to the reader! It seems that it is upon one of the Santa Fe
denizens to sit down cheek-to-jowl (N95-to-Bandana) with Nick and help
him learn one of the conventional idioms for text-larding.
My own Larding may be faulty I realize because I let it flow from what
is easy with Thunderbird (my mail tool of choice) and since I (re)read
my own material in Thunderbird I would never know if it renders uglified
elsewhere/weiz.
The UNIX mailtool technique/support I grew up with was simply to add a
series of > like a shell prompt at the start of each line which might or
might not include a prefix unique identifier:
/>>>line from message three iterations back/
/>> line from message 2 iterations back (presumably in response to
the line above)/
/> line from previous message with two "greater than" '>' symbols/
or
/GEPR>>>>some statement/
/NST>>> some rephrasing of/commentary on the above statement/
/GEPR>> pithy retort/
/SASS > dumbass interjection oblique to pithy retort to rephrasing
of some statement/
/current final response to the above by the current correspondent as
indicated in mail header/
HTML/formatting editors (including T-Bird) seem to do their alternative
well enough, but I could be biased.
/
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:
5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
