__/ [Ramon F Herrera] on Friday 10 February 2006 07:58 \__
>> This is implicitly included in the original article. Please quote and
>> attribute, Rex
>
> Roy, with all due respect: you are being ridiculous. How long have you
> been using the Usenet? To attribute something that was "implicitly
> included"? Give us a break...
>
> Not even in the most formal academic paper there is such a requirement.
>
> How do you know that the original article's author wasn't the one that
> got inspired by Rex's writings? Rex has been writing forever about
> Microsoft sabotage techniques.
>
> -Ramon
I accept your argument, but what I meant to say is that the top part of
messages should indicate what item the follow-up is bound to (attribution).
This helps those of us who do not view the newsgroups in threaded mode or
even sort messages by subject lines. Regarding quoting, this helps people
join the discussion without having to 'travel' from one message to another
in order to gather context.
My message was not a criticism of Rex or the content of his message(s). I
regularly read his message and I only wanted to make it a gentle request. My
own posting habits are not perfect either and they sometimes irritate
people, which is why I became sensitive to it.
Best wishes,
Roy
|
|
