From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 62045 invoked by alias); 26 Aug 2017 15:26:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 62030 invoked by uid 89); 26 Aug 2017 15:26:13 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,GIT_PATCH_2,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=remotely, replies, began, HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-HELO: mail-io0-f175.google.com Received: from mail-io0-f175.google.com (HELO mail-io0-f175.google.com) (209.85.223.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 26 Aug 2017 15:26:11 +0000 Received: by mail-io0-f175.google.com with SMTP id c18so5511268ioj.1 for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2017 08:26:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=lRpUySnDkJXz349am9HXoq+jkydUY4Jz+U2+5nvcQYk=; b=a70Xc0n23229TvxBI99495GsoIRf7/CEMeAclQiWdIKwBORkci30QqOl/VM3GvZUje dhD0BJXfISN3LdUl8FSLMMqPvnpoBNMK5VrTBn43XTqYlK5uw39JwXH4UveepS1EdorB 66vI7ZWbX5H3Y5QVFpgJoFzJeOQoUV7ctnYi02AiEPYATj8jMSOXJrJ+CI3ZgY02Awrn k62sOxELxK50BtT/wgKHJSRD8qNHJH1b927NKCbUW/DJ4jnqk6/vGXpafpTzNlvjrQlX avNEwlHRCLJGBJYLm3JMgTDTyqaxb73vi5gvnr5XKeVmpzFnv4qM+kLmvCrSGm82jrEk JbtA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5gfylannwK9Yx9vjtYAh2SUkQqPj5VDADpKSniufIZxudAx4yoT oOEz0rmYeXPchTc/ X-Received: by 10.107.185.215 with SMTP id j206mr1573950iof.326.1503761170049; Sat, 26 Aug 2017 08:26:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.6] (d4-50-42-50.try.wideopenwest.com. [50.4.50.42]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i81sm1866651itb.14.2017.08.26.08.26.09 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 26 Aug 2017 08:26:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: convenient trimming of quoted text to make points To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <000001d31acd$108b0340$31a109c0$@rogers.com> <0ac245f1-002b-2993-c1de-e4ddaafa9c7d@cs.umass.edu> <637017a5-b774-cb10-f064-065d20e421b3@cs.umass.edu> <599F710B.1070306@tlinx.org> <59A10F64.50602@tlinx.org> From: cyg Simple Message-ID: <2c0db7af-01f2-c43a-597f-de069a8c18ab@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2017 15:26:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <59A10F64.50602@tlinx.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-08/txt/msg00240.txt.bz2 On 8/26/2017 2:04 AM, L A Walsh wrote: > cyg Simple wrote: >> On 8/24/2017 8:36 PM, L A Walsh wrote: >>   >>> If you can't trim your quoted text, then please stop burying the >>> new stuff on the bottom. >>>     >> >> Did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed.  I see from a google >> search that you've had problems with style in the past even on this list. >>   > Maybe I'm one of the few who has RSI and gets irritated by having > to go through extra steps to skip large walls of text. I don't know what RSI is. I might guess it to be Residual Self Image or Remotely Sensed Imagery. ;p >> List etiquette frowns on both bottom and top posting and warrants to >> interleaving the replies. >>   > --- >    I know of no list where that is commonly practiced. Every list including this one since before you began using email lists. Interleaving began back in the days before the RFC for email standards was created. The fact that people misuse quoting doesn't change the etiquette for using interleaving which most open source lists state to use. >> Well all and good but you hijacked a thread to bring home a point which >> is in itself just wrong. >>   > To selectively quote things in your reply to make your point is the > problem here, since I replied to the original subject, extensively. > It was you who deleted the "on-topic" part of the message to make > your point. > No, you changed it, the client I use elided the (was: ...) portion since it was no longer the subject to which I was responding. And my context to you did not include any of the original message. -- cyg Simple -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple