more usenet implications from court case

GoneBeforeMyTime wrote:
On Quoting convention thing, I could go to X-News. It's free.

Dumbass,

Good idea. It'd save you trouble.

Bob Schwartz

On Aug 22, 4:35*pm, Bob Schwartz
wrote:
GoneBeforeMyTime wrote:
On Quoting convention thing, I could go to X-News. It's free.

Dumbass,

Good idea. It'd save you trouble.

Bob Schwartz

There's also this:

http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=oe+quote+fix

Ben

http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

Michael Press wrote:
Computers do exactly what they are told.
Humans can train themselves to quote properly,
or choose to continue not quoting properly.

What about SchwartzSoft bots ?

GoneBeforeMyTime wrote:


On Quoting convention thing, I could go to X-News. It's free.



Quit using Outhouse to post with or at least take the time to configure
it properly. And while we're at it - quit trying to justify your lame posts.


Bill


--
William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com

On Aug 22, 6:49*pm, "
wrote:
On Aug 22, 4:35*pm, Bob Schwartz
wrote:

GoneBeforeMyTime wrote:
On Quoting convention thing, I could go to X-News. It's free.

Dumbass,

Good idea. It'd save you trouble.

Bob Schwartz

There's also this:

http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=oe+quote+fix

Ben

http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

Haven't seen that before, made me laugh!
-Paul

On Aug 23, 7:26*am, William Mattil wrote:

Quit using Outhouse to post with or at least take the time to configure
it properly. And while we're at it - quit trying to justify your lame posts.

It's an interesting commentary on society in general these days.
People would rather argue about something than fix it- to absurd
lengths.
Sheesh, you guys and your newsreader death panels. ;-))
-Paul

GoneBeforeMyTime wrote:
Wow, fast reply. Just curious, do you constantly monitor this group?

Dumbass,

Surely you recognize the need to monitor rogue news agents
that chronically mishandle headers?

And besides, newsreading and posting is easily automated.

Bob Schwartz

GoneBeforeMyTime wrote:

" wrote in message
...
On Aug 22, 10:31 am, "GoneBeforeMyTime" wrote:
" wrote in message


It's not the ****ing signature delimiter. It's the ****ing
quotation indenter. This is not ****ing rocket science.

Ben
**** this.

Tha'ts BS. Quotes have noting to do with how headers are applied. The
quoting convention is a whole nother thing which causes problems between
news agents.

Stop talking about the goddamn header. The
References: line is fine. We can figure out the nesting
in the attributions at the top. Nobody reads that anyway
so your complaining about whether someone deletes
all the "So-and-so wrote:" lines (I _think_ that's what
you are complaining about) is beside the point.

The problem is that your newsreader doesn't put in
the quote indentation " " marks so it's impossible to
come along later and distinguish what you wrote from
what the person you're quoting wrote. This causes
the mis-attributions that you are complaining about.
You used to quote correctly and in the past several
weeks you've managed to change something so you don't.

It bothers you enough to post about it, so it's on you
to do something to fix it. Take responsibility.

Ben

On Quoting convention thing, I could go to X-News. It's free.

This reminds of people who send me email from their sorry-ass AOL accounts
with ****ing advertisments in the body. You have no idea how much that
****es me off. And then when I tell them this is occurring, they wonder why
it bothers me.....

Magilla

In article ,
Donald Munro wrote:

Michael Press wrote:
Computers do exactly what they are told.
Humans can train themselves to quote properly,
or choose to continue not quoting properly.

What about SchwartzSoft bots ?

Proprietary code. Stochastic ALU?

--
Michael Press

" wrote in message
...

It's not the ****ing signature delimiter. It's the ****ing
quotation indenter. This is not ****ing rocket science.

If it's so easy why don't you tell him what to do about it?