Frank wrote:
> John,
>
> In your post that I'm now replying to, only two of the
> lines that you've attributed to me were actually
> written by me. This is actually no trivial matter,
> because I think that the issue of whether HCB cropped
> may be fairly important - at least it is to me.
>
> I don't mean to dump on you personally, as it's a
> widespread problem. It seems to me that if one is
> going to quote a previous post (which of course is
> only polite, as it puts a reply in context), care
> should be taken to make sure that quotes are
> attributed to their proper authors.
>
> Again, not trying to point at you specifically, but in
> this case it might appear that I'm taking a contrary
> statement to what I've been consistently saying in the
> past day as regards this issue. So, I thought I'd
> mention it <vbg>.
>
> Thanks for your understanding.
>
> cheers,
> frank
If you look at the post in question again, Frank, you'll
find that I didn't attribute any lines to you. I merely
replied to an (unattributed) post, which in turn had quoted
your remarks (and had correctly attributed them to you).
You'll find that the attribution to you is itself identified as
quoted text in the conventional fashion ("> " in the margin).
This, in turn, means that your text would be expected to be
prefixed by two levels of quotation markers ("> > ").
As far as I can tell this was, in fact, the case.
