Ooohh, goody, the Top Posting Debate. Quite possibly the oldest troll on alt.flame!!!
And *every* time I see it I feel this witless compulsion to wonder just what the fuck this >>>> anotation convention is for, if not to allow replies to be interspersed in the original material with regard to subjective context. Dhu On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 22:04:40 -0500 Marco Peereboom <sl...@peereboom.us> wrote: > Oh hai! > > You know you don't have to read what I write you know. If it irritates > you that is your problem, not mine. Feel free to ignore this. > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 09:52:46PM -0500, Neal Hogan wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Marco Peereboom <sl...@peereboom.us> wrote: > > > oooh that looks perfect; let me try that. > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 06:27:13PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote: > > >> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Marco Peereboom <sl...@peereboom.us> > > >> wrote: > > >> > Drawing shit with the mouse. ?Not typing stuff with the keybored. > > >> > > >> webcanvas.com ?Just carve off a section as your territory, like > > >> http://webcanvas.com/100N600W#-228000,-30000,0 > > > > > > > > > > I understand that mr. peereboom (thinks he) is rather important to the > > obsd project . . . no doubt he (thinks) he is, but I was wondering if > > mr. peereboom ever thought about the silliness of top-posting (I'm > > sure he has and that's why he does it ;-). > > > > I've not been here that long, but it seems that his mailing list > > behavior is okay . . .? > > > > Other than his sarcasm, he has useful posts that are fucked up by his > > apparent need/desire to top post. > > > > Marco . . . can you please use accepted (i.e., rational) protocol from > > now on? misc@ is not personal correspondence . . . many of us > > appreciate what goes on here and your top-posting is . . . well . . . > > annoying (to say the least).
