__/ [ Mark Kent ] on Monday 21 August 2006 14:30 \__
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> __/ [ Roy Culley ] on Saturday 19 August 2006 23:42 \__
>>
>>> begin risky.vbs
>>> <1575172.eN7Y9ry7y7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>
>>>> It kinda bugs me. *smile*
>>>
>>> I enjoy your posts Roy but it bugs me when you go to the effort of
>>> writing '*smile*' when a simple smiley will do. It makes you look a
>>> little 'naive'. :-)
>>
>> Really? I have always been doing that. I have always perceived the
>> symbolic form as somewhat 'open to interpretation' or immature. Maybe I
>> just associate it with youngsters in ICQ and MySpace ("omg!!!!!!!! tis is
>> kewl!! ;-)"). Anyway, I spotted a mistake/typo in my last message. Should
>> have been 'bootscreen' or 'bootsplash', not 'bootloader', even though grub
>> and lilo are modifiable too (not easily). I once read an howto on ways of
>> changing the image and further customising that screen (which a Linux user
>> may only see a few times a year).
>
> Smileys are fine, to be honest, and tend to confer a deeper sense of
> meaning.
I think I'll stick with verbal ones. *smile*
|
|
