Hi Dierk. At 6:21 AM on Saturday, September 28, 2002 you [DH] wrote the following about 'Editing incoming mail (was: Wish list item)':
DH> This is nothing else than what I wrote: DH> "Annotating" being the operative word DH> here. It is something completely DH> different from "Changing" or "Altering". DH> Your reply to me and mine to you are DH> different messages than the original one. DH> I cite your comments, upon which I DH> comment anew, just for convenience DH> (better to follow a discussion, honesty DH> about the sender's intent etc.), I don't DH> change them. With one exception, I "cut" DH> them to the gist. Without commenting on the merits of your position one way or the other, it strikes me that you may be coming to this question from a very different POV that some of the others commenting on this thread. As a professional writer [if memory serves me] you are, have a right to be & should be, very concerned with copyright & ownership issues. The question is whether or not this applies to a list like this which I would liken to an intellectual cocktail party where there are a variety of conversations going on simultaneously by small clusters of individuals. Anyone publishing official works or quoting would/should identify them as such whether in conversation or in writing. But the subject line may not be inviolate as it is may not be considered content. Just some thought[s] on this lazy Sat morning. BTW, anyone who wants to change the subject of this post for archival purposes can do so AFAIC or annotate it to their heart's content. -- Jan Rifkinson Ridgefield, CT USA TB! V1.61/W2K_SP3 ICQ 41116329 ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
