In article ,
Tim McNamara wrote:

In article ,
Michael Press wrote:

In article ,
Tom Sherman °_° wrote:

On 8/30/2010 5:58 PM, Michael Press wrote:
In ,
Tom Sherman wrote:

On 8/29/2010 8:42 PM, Michael Press wrote:
In ,
Tom Sherman wrote:

On 8/29/2010 2:42 PM, Michael Press wrote:
In ,
Tom Sherman
wrote:

On 8/29/2010 1:29 PM, André Jute wrote:
[...]

crickets

A word to the wise. Do not put text i[n] quotation marks that
the quoted person did not write.

Michael Press is surprisingly unaware of the standard
convention of brackets indicating and editorial insertion or
deletion. Therefore, there is nothing dishonest or misleading
in what I did.

You cite a paper and ink rule. This is not paper and ink.

Thanks for letting me know.

We can leave quoted text intact. Exercise this option.

What if the text is both boring and annoying?

As Michael Press is well aware, snipping ALL of Mr. Jute's text
in my reply was the point.

Do not put text in quotation marks that the attributed writer did
not write. To do so is unnecessary, misleading, and not good
manners. That is my point. I only mentioned it after you had done
it more than once.

Sheesh, angle brackets are not quotation marks.

They mark a quotation in usenet and email. Everybody takes them that
way.

Only you, apparently.

But please yourself. What remains is that you put text in a place
that everybody takes to be the place for the text somebody else
wrote.

Good grief. If I look up "pedant" on Wikipedia, will it include your
portrait in the article?

I'll tell ya sumthin.
When I start to speak loosely, people will
deliberately misconstrue to score debating points.
Take it as you will.

--
Michael Press