Re: Please quote just what's needed
Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 4:51 pm
KPeter Duggan wrote:
http://forums.chiffandfipple.com/
http://forums.chiffandfipple.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=106022
KPeter Duggan wrote:
.Nanohedron wrote:Tsk.
And there is Poes Law to consider.fatmac wrote:............
Also wish more people would use the 'smilies', as it makes posts clearer, where there may be misinterpretation owing to global location.
Talking of which, why is it that every time you post a bleedin' insect lands on my screen and crawls around on it annoyingly??!?!DrPhill wrote:And there is Poes Law to consider.
Because there is no 'googly eyed frog' to catch it? Dunno. I give up.... tell me?DrPhill wrote:....why is it that every time you post a bleedin' insect lands on my screen and crawls around on it....
Did you mean: ?DrPhill wrote:Because there is no 'googly eyed frog' to catch it?
Yes, well spotted.kkrell wrote:Did you mean: [img....]?
Good to know he is still around somewhere - I have not seen a post by him for a long while.kkrell wrote:He is supposed to be at today's session in Long Beach.
Has still made little impression on some because we still get needless whole-quote posts all the time even when there's no need to quote at all!Katharine wrote:I know, this was posted some time ago, but
Of course it would have to be as a courtesy recommendation, not as hard-and-fast policy. We can't beat people up over it, but we could hope that influence might work.Peter Duggan wrote:FWIW, I'd like to see something in the C&F Consolidated Concordat on Policy (CCCP)...
A recommendation would be fine when I'm not proposing beating up anyone!Nanohedron wrote:Of course it would have to be as a courtesy recommendation, not as hard-and-fast policy. We can't beat people up over it, but we could hope that influence might work.
Pages where you have to look hard to pick out the new content hiding between walls of quote. It's really counterproductive in obscuring it and preventing fluent assimilation.What are you meaning by "quote fog"?
Oh, "walls of quote" - what I call the "blackened page". I'm good for those. You know, I think some people just can't be arsed to pare it down when they're quoting, even less to break up a screed into its component parts so as to tackle them point by point. In all fairness, it can take some drudgework if you intend to cover most or all of it. That never stopped me, though; but then, I'm detail-oriented.Peter Duggan wrote:Pages where you have to look hard to pick out the new content hiding between walls of quote. It's really counterproductive in obscuring it and preventing fluent assimilation.Nanohedron wrote:What are you meaning by "quote fog"?