> > Note that they provide no left-margin quote marks,
> > nor any indication of where the original message ends,
> > and they leave a blank line or two at the top, implying
> > that your reply should go there (otherwise, why
> > put it there?).
>
> That's a configurable setting in Outlook Express.
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 04:07:40PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
>> >> * You are not expected to understand this.
>> >> --comment from Unix system 6 source, credited to Lions and Johnson
>> >> Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who: finger m
Ahhh. So the brokenness lies in the lack of quotation definers and the
implicit one line open (BTW, pine/pico leaves two, but angle-brackets
things in pretty well). I just figured that the brokenness was an
artifact of where the cursor gets put, not having dealt with Lookout
(personal reasons, I
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 04:07:40PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> >> * You are not expected to understand this.
> >> --comment from Unix system 6 source, credited to Lions and Johnson
> >> Who is John Galt? [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who: finger me for GPG key
> >
> >Since you're such a fan of
* Craig Dickson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010905 23:53]:
>
> Microsoft's mail clients, on the other hand, give you something like
> this:
>
> ___cut_here___
>
>
> --- Original message --- From: John Galt
>
> Elm predates any microsoft email product... Try to quote stuff in elm,
> the cursor goes to the
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 04:51:20PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
|
| Elm predates any microsoft email product... Try to quote stuff in elm,
| the cursor goes to the beginning of the text.
Don't all editors start with the cursor at the beginning? I used vim
in elm before I now use vim in mutt. Regard
John Galt wrote:
> Elm predates any microsoft email product... Try to quote stuff in elm,
> the cursor goes to the beginning of the text.
Where the cursor starts out is beside the point. What matters is the
structure of the message. Most traditional Internet email clients, such
as elm or mutt, gi
Elm predates any microsoft email product... Try to quote stuff in elm,
the cursor goes to the beginning of the text.
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Bud Rogers wrote:
>On Tuesday 04 September 2001 22:43 pm, Craig Dickson wrote:
>
>> Karsten is using the word as it is commonly used among computer
>> profess
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 09:34:05PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote:
>>
>> >On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:11:03PM -0700, Eric G. Miller wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 03:10:27PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
>> >> >
On Wednesday 05 September 2001 05:45 am, Bud Rogers wrote:
> Except that in this case we're not talking about a practice that was not
> previously common or even not so common.
That's not a double negative, it's a brain fart. I meant to say "We're not
talking about a practice that was previous
Rob Ransbottom wrote:
> If one watches for how misunderstandings occur and expand
> one can write so as to minimize them.
As someone once said, "You sadist! You're asking people to THINK!"
Much as I agree with everything you wrote, I think you're wasting your
breath. Written conversation is not
I agree. See you don't know what part of whose post I agree with.
More in readable order follows.
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 01:53:24PM -0600, John Galt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > In case nobody told you, this is a mailinglist, not usenet.
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 07:27:13PM +0200, Cliff Sarginson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 11:52:27AM -0500, ktb wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 08:48:22AM -0700, Craig Dickson wrote:
> > > Bud Rogers wrote:
> > >
> > > > Except that in this case we're not talking about a practice that was
> >
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 11:52:27AM -0500, ktb wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 08:48:22AM -0700, Craig Dickson wrote:
> > Bud Rogers wrote:
> >
> > > Except that in this case we're not talking about a practice that was
> > > not previously common or even not so common. We're talking about a
> > >
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 10:13:08PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> >The problem with suggesting prefix responses are suitable in any context
> >is that this leads almost immediately to bad practices:
>
> Yeah, like the free exchange of ideas: can't have that.
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 08:48:22AM -0700, Craig Dickson wrote:
> Bud Rogers wrote:
>
> > Except that in this case we're not talking about a practice that was
> > not previously common or even not so common. We're talking about a
> > practice that was virtually unknown until Microsoft flooded the m
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 09:34:05PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:11:03PM -0700, Eric G. Miller wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 03:10:27PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> >> > but this practice is strongly deprecated.
>
Bud Rogers wrote:
> Except that in this case we're not talking about a practice that was
> not previously common or even not so common. We're talking about a
> practice that was virtually unknown until Microsoft flooded the market
> with badly broken mail and news clients that make it very difficu
On Tuesday 04 September 2001 22:43 pm, Craig Dickson wrote:
> Karsten is using the word as it is commonly used among computer
> professionals. When some previously-common (or even not so common)
> practice or standard is superseded and no longer recommended, it is said
> to be "deprecated". One of
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 18:11:03 -0700, Eric G. Miller wrote:
> Webster's Ninth Collegiate Dictionary has this to say...
>
> dep-re-cate 1. to express mild or regretful disapproval of 2.
> DEPRECIATE
The Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, 5th ed. says "to feel and express
disapproval
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 03:10:27PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 01:53:24PM -0600, John Galt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > In case nobody told you, this is a mailinglist, not usenet.
>
> Wrong, it's both:
>
> news:muc.lists.debian.user
>
> > To be more preci
on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:11:03PM -0700, Eric G. Miller (egm2@jps.net) wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 03:10:27PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
<...>
> > Thanks to poor design of some PC-based mail agents, one will
> > occasionally see the entire quoted message after the response, like
%% Regarding Re: Quoting styles, cont (Was Re: Fonts in GTK);
%% "Eric G. Miller" writes:
>> but this practice is strongly deprecated.
egm>^^^
egm> Hell does that mean?
egm> Webster's Ninth Collegi
You top posted on purpose. Didn't you? Ahh, you rat bastard! ;)
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 09:34:05PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
>
> Well that's the problem, isn't it? Karsten (and yourself, variously)
> isn't really "putting up" with it, now is he?
>
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote:
>
>
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 08:43:02PM -0700, Craig Dickson wrote:
> Eric G. Miller wrote:
>
> > > but this practice is strongly deprecated.
> >^^^
> >Hell does that mean?
> >
> > Webster's Ninth Collegiate Dictionary has thi
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote:
>on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 01:53:24PM -0600, John Galt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>>
>> In case nobody told you, this is a mailinglist, not usenet.
>
>Wrong, it's both:
>
>news:muc.lists.debian.user
mail to news gateways notwithstanding
>> To be more
Eric G. Miller wrote:
> > but this practice is strongly deprecated.
>^^^
> Hell does that mean?
>
> Webster's Ninth Collegiate Dictionary has this to say...
>
> dep-re-cate 1. to express mild or regretful disapprov
Well that's the problem, isn't it? Karsten (and yourself, variously)
isn't really "putting up" with it, now is he?
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:11:03PM -0700, Eric G. Miller wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 03:10:27PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
>> >
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 06:11:03PM -0700, Eric G. Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 03:10:27PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > but this practice is strongly deprecated.
>^^^
> Hell does that mean?
>
> Webster's Ni
On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 03:10:27PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
[snip]
> From "Email Quotes" in the Jargon File:
> http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/Email-Quotes.html
>
> Most netters view an inclusion as a promise that comment on it will
> immediately follow. The preferre
on Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 01:53:24PM -0600, John Galt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> In case nobody told you, this is a mailinglist, not usenet.
Wrong, it's both:
news:muc.lists.debian.user
> To be more precise, this is a reliable method of ensuring that
> anything you reply to has already
31 matches
Mail list logo
