Another plane down

Were you responding to Arnolds post, or Jays post?
If you don't include at least a portion of the post that you are
addressing, then your post is meaningless as we don't know what you are
responding to!

Tony
--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

In article .com,
"NVArt" wrote:

Hopefully, he learned from this experience. I love cheap lessons!

tony roberts wrote:

If you don't include at least a portion of the post that you are
addressing, then your post is meaningless as we don't know what you are
responding to!

Quoting a small amount of relevant material is always a good idea, but
viewing the messages as a thread in a threaded newsreader makes it clear
what post was being referred to.

Quoting a small amount of relevant material is always a good idea, but
viewing the messages as a thread in a threaded newsreader makes it clear
what post was being referred to.

Only if the preceding message has actually =arrived= at that particular
server (they often arrive out of sequence for technical reasons). Also,
not all newsreaders thread properly (this includes the newsreader used
by the responder, whose response may not be attached to the same post he
thinks he's responding to)

And while I'm on the subject, if you separate your post from the sig
line (if any) by two dashes and a space followed by a carriage return,
many (most?) newsreaders will recognize what follows as a sig line and
treat it appropriately (different typeface, indentation, or whatever)
which lets the actual message stand out.

Jose
--
You may not get what you pay for, but you sure as hell pay for what you get.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

(Jeff wrote)
" Quoting a small amount of relevant material is always a good idea, but
viewing the messages as a thread in a threaded newsreader makes it clear
what post was being referred to.


I (occasionally) run into problems figuring a post out because I often
delete the latest chunk of new messages after I've read through them. I
don't like all of those old messages hanging around - that's what
Google/Groups is for.

After I've cleared out the old messages, I'll generally read what arrives
new.

Oddly, I catch myself only skimming the fresh downloads when they are
dropped into an existing thread tree - an existing thread tree with hundreds
of old posts in it. Quirky me?

M$ OE 6.0
'Mark Conversation as Read' is a wonderful button :-)


Montblack

Jeff writes:

tony roberts wrote:

If you don't include at least a portion of the post that you are
addressing, then your post is meaningless as we don't know what you are
responding to!

Quoting a small amount of relevant material is always a good idea, but
viewing the messages as a thread in a threaded newsreader makes it clear
what post was being referred to.

If all the relevant posts have arrived at your server by then, and are
still visible, yes.

Quoting is much safer.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/