Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Deep Foiled Malls wrote:

> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 09:13:24 +0000, The Reids
> <dontuse@fell-walker.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>Following up to michaelnewport@yahoo.com
>>
>>
>>>buy a 'rough guide' and go ?
>>
>>It makes life much easier if we don't have to search back through
>>the thread to see what you are commenting on!
>
>
> Pisses me off too when people do that. Given we often have threads of
> over 100 messages, I regularly delete them, only to have someone post
> a reply to some message and deleting the context of it.


It's almost as bad as the folks who trim stuff but trim the names for
messages they leave and trim messages for names that they leave.

Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
easier.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:

[]
> Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
> easier.

No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
o' th' barn) wrote:

>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>[]
>> Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>> easier.
>
>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.

Are you talking about us?

Really?

Sensible and responsible? Us? US?

Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?

--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Xref: 127.0.0.1 rec.travel.europe:662473

Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:

> this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
> o' th' barn) wrote:
>
> >Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> >[]
> >> Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
> >> easier.
> >
> >No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
> >a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>
> Are you talking about us?
>
> Really?
>
> Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>
> Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?

I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:

> Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>
>
>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>[]
>>>
>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>easier.
>>>
>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>
>>Are you talking about us?
>>
>>Really?
>>
>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>
>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>
>
> I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>


It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
sensible although it is common.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:

> Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>
>
>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>[]
>>>
>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>easier.
>>>
>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>
>>Are you talking about us?
>>
>>Really?
>>
>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>
>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>
>
> I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>


It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
sensible although it is common.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:

> Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>
>
>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>[]
>>>
>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>easier.
>>>
>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>
>>Are you talking about us?
>>
>>Really?
>>
>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>
>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>
>
> I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>


It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
sensible although it is common.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

"Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>
>> Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>
>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>easier.
>>>>
>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>
>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>
>>>Really?
>>>
>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>
>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>
>>
>> I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>
>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>sensible although it is common.
>
You're trolling.

--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

"Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>
>> Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>
>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>easier.
>>>>
>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>
>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>
>>>Really?
>>>
>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>
>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>
>>
>> I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>
>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>sensible although it is common.
>
You're trolling.

--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

"Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>
>> Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>
>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>easier.
>>>>
>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>
>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>
>>>Really?
>>>
>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>
>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>
>>
>> I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>
>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>sensible although it is common.
>
You're trolling.

--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

On 2005-03-03 11:18:38 -0800, Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> said:

> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>>
>>> Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>> this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>> o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>> easier.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>> a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>>
>>>> Are you talking about us?
>>>> Really?
>>>>
>>>> Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>>
>>>> Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>>
>> It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>> muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>> deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>> sensible although it is common.
>>
> You're trolling.
Top posting is a "gay thing" isn't it ? bill

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

On 2005-03-03 11:18:38 -0800, Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> said:

> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>>
>>> Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>> this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>> o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>> easier.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>> a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>>
>>>> Are you talking about us?
>>>> Really?
>>>>
>>>> Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>>
>>>> Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>>
>> It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>> muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>> deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>> sensible although it is common.
>>
> You're trolling.
Top posting is a "gay thing" isn't it ? bill

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Padraig Breathnach wrote:

> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>>easier.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>>
>>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>>
>>>>Really?
>>>>
>>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>>
>>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>>
>>
>>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>>sensible although it is common.
>>
>
> You're trolling.
>


Not really. I actually do prefer top posting and think that it is more
sensible.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Padraig Breathnach wrote:

> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>>easier.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>>
>>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>>
>>>>Really?
>>>>
>>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>>
>>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>>
>>
>>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>>sensible although it is common.
>>
>
> You're trolling.
>


Not really. I actually do prefer top posting and think that it is more
sensible.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Padraig Breathnach wrote:

> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>>easier.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>>
>>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>>
>>>>Really?
>>>>
>>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>>
>>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>>
>>
>>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>>sensible although it is common.
>>
>
> You're trolling.
>


Not really. I actually do prefer top posting and think that it is more
sensible.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Padraig Breathnach wrote:

> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>>easier.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>>
>>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>>
>>>>Really?
>>>>
>>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>>
>>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>>
>>
>>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>>sensible although it is common.
>>
>
> You're trolling.
>


Not really. I actually do prefer top posting and think that it is more
sensible.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Padraig Breathnach wrote:

> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>>easier.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>>
>>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>>
>>>>Really?
>>>>
>>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>>
>>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>>
>>
>>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>>sensible although it is common.
>>
>
> You're trolling.
>


Not really. I actually do prefer top posting and think that it is more
sensible.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Padraig Breathnach wrote:

> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>>easier.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>>
>>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>>
>>>>Really?
>>>>
>>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>>
>>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>>
>>
>>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>>sensible although it is common.
>>
>
> You're trolling.
>


Not really. I actually do prefer top posting and think that it is more
sensible.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Padraig Breathnach wrote:

> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>>easier.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>>
>>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>>
>>>>Really?
>>>>
>>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>>
>>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>>
>>
>>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>>sensible although it is common.
>>
>
> You're trolling.
>


Not really. I actually do prefer top posting and think that it is more
sensible.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Padraig Breathnach wrote:

> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Padraig Breathnach <padraigb@MUNGEDiol.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>this_address_is_for_spam@yahoo.com (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>>>o' th' barn) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Frank F. Matthews <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Shall we start another diversion to top posting where the trimming is
>>>>>>easier.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, because most sensible, responsible Usenet posters have already made
>>>>>a clear decision as to the issue of top posting.
>>>>
>>>>Are you talking about us?
>>>>
>>>>Really?
>>>>
>>>>Sensible and responsible? Us? US?
>>>>
>>>>Nah. You're being ironic, arentcha?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm talking about the way "we" post, not what we post about!
>>>
>>
>>It does, however, lead many posters into perdition as they manage to
>>muck up the links between attributions and the material when they do
>>deletions. It may be viewed as responsible but it certainly isn't
>>sensible although it is common.
>>
>
> You're trolling.
>


Not really. I actually do prefer top posting and think that it is more
sensible.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged