On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 15:45, Derek Martin wrote: > More often than not, said aggravation is, I think, the result of the > ego of the OP being unwilling to take being corrected/criticized.
I'm more than willing to be corrected/criticized. I don't think it is fair for someone to extrapolate a general statement into state of mind. It seems that some list members believe I'm a completely lazy bastard with no consideration to other list members based on one statement I made. That statement about laziness was referring to the time we all take a shortcut, irregardless of the consequences. Well I hope that my future actions will speak louder than my previous words. > Otherwise a polite acknowledgement is all that is needed. Mike's > original request to avoid top posting was terse but polite, and should > be viewed by all for what it is: a polite request for people to > conform to what most agree is the modus operandi of list posters here > on this list, and in general good netiquette. The OP can ignore such > requests if he/she wants to (though should expect full well to be > castigated further in the future for not complying), but arguing about > it is pointless. I'm not choosing to ignore it. I'm not for top posting. I'm for trying to find a way to prevent it. I agree that my desire to have option for the mail user agent help prevent top posting is not a substitute for education. But it can't hurt either. Note: I'm assuming that OP refers to me, if it meant as a reference to top posters in general then I'm sorry for my confusion. -- Jeff Macdonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
