Me think Nadeem is making an issue of a small thing...i agree with DoOrsOfpErcEpTioN and use of top-down that ppl... who r following the thread would not be intrested to read the complete mail just to read the reply, nd commenting on things like being lazy.....is a bit tooooooo personal to comment on nd chat style lingos r also accepted in Universities exams now.....[:)]....so y not use it.....i dnt find any probs in using them.....
And haan just too add...to being lazy...USE OF "NMK"....instead of ur complete name..."NADEEM M. KHAN".........aint this being LAZY....... Regards, Vipin --- On Thu, 7/5/09, Nadeem M. Khan <[email protected]> wrote: From: Nadeem M. Khan <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [LinuxVadaPav] Re: Must Read!! To: [email protected] Date: Thursday, 7 May, 2009, 6:21 PM On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 2:57 PM, DoOrsOfpErcEpTioN <msgcof...@yahoo. com> wrote: > It makes sense to read question and then answer. how else any1 would do > otherwise? > The above is quite a subjective issue. Some ppl like me can use snip-in > format of reply. This reply to u is a snip without the use of '<snip>' > since we have '>' to indicate former response. > Some just dont delete former response(s) may be bcos: (a) it is either > included by default and/or (b) modifying original reponse is an > unethical practice. > I think classical semantics (that u r highlighting) do not approve of > modifying original either! We are not in a teen chat room. I am not comfortable reading your chat-style lingo. Is it too much of an effort for you too use proper, professional English instead of words like any1, ppl, u, bcos, r ? Regards, NMK. Bollywood news, movie reviews, film trailers and more! Go to http://in.movies.yahoo.com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
