Israeli Air Force to lose Middle East Air Superiority Capability to the Saudis in the near future

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 10:53:02 -0400, wrote:
ROFLOL that's the biggest BS story Ever
"I have seen the worst that man can do.and I can still laugh loudly"
R.J. Goldman

Was it really necessary to quote 180 lines merely to add that small
comment?

BTW, could you please respect Usenet community values by not
top-posting in future.

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

When the reply posting is far more interesting than the original post,
top posting is not only acceptable, it is preferable. That's why some
newsreaders automatically place the response at the top of the thread.

Oh yeah . . . I almost forgot . . . please **** off!


On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:39:35 +0100, (phil hunt)
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 10:53:02 -0400, wrote:
ROFLOL that's the biggest BS story Ever
"I have seen the worst that man can do.and I can still laugh loudly"
R.J. Goldman

Was it really necessary to quote 180 lines merely to add that small
comment?

BTW, could you please respect Usenet community values by not
top-posting in future.

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

"Richard Cranium" wrote in message

When the reply posting is far more interesting than the original post,
top posting is not only acceptable, it is preferable.

Wrong.

Do a google search sometime and find out just how "acceptable" top-posting
is.

That's why some
newsreaders automatically place the response at the top of the thread.

Wrong again. No newsreader automatically places the response at the top of
the "thread". I think you meant "message".

Newsreader software puts the reply where *you* type it, sparky. If you'd
move your flabtabulous arm just a bit and mash your flipper on the mouse
button you'd get the cursor below the quoted text and then your replies
would be un****ed. But I doubt if you'll do that. You're too busy mailing
205 friends a "VIRUS ALERT!!!111oneone" warning that you were forwarded from
Bill Gates himself! (I mean it must be true - it says "Bill Gates" in the
"FROM" line!)

HTH HAND KTHXBYE.

--
http://www.delversdungeon.dragonsfoot.org
Remove the X's in my email address to respond.
"Damn you Silvey, and your endless fortunes." - Stephen Weir
I hate furries.

Sorry Silvey. THIS is where the cursor appears in Agent when a
message is opened for reply. As for the rest of your response, please
understand that my post was meant to be ironic. And you are correct .
.. . I did mean "message". I don't understand your reference to
"mailing 205 friends, etc.", unless you're just being a bit of a
dip****. In that case, YOU can un**** this message by copying and
pasting this paragraph to the location of your choice.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 03:56:43 GMT, "Bill Silvey"
wrote:

"Richard Cranium" wrote in message

When the reply posting is far more interesting than the original post,
top posting is not only acceptable, it is preferable.

Wrong.

Do a google search sometime and find out just how "acceptable" top-posting
is.

That's why some
newsreaders automatically place the response at the top of the thread.

Wrong again. No newsreader automatically places the response at the top of
the "thread". I think you meant "message".

Newsreader software puts the reply where *you* type it, sparky. If you'd
move your flabtabulous arm just a bit and mash your flipper on the mouse
button you'd get the cursor below the quoted text and then your replies
would be un****ed. But I doubt if you'll do that. You're too busy mailing
205 friends a "VIRUS ALERT!!!111oneone" warning that you were forwarded from
Bill Gates himself! (I mean it must be true - it says "Bill Gates" in the
"FROM" line!)

HTH HAND KTHXBYE.

--
http://www.delversdungeon.dragonsfoot.org
Remove the X's in my email address to respond.
"Damn you Silvey, and your endless fortunes." - Stephen Weir
I hate furries.

(Richard Cranium) wrote:

Sorry Silvey. THIS is where the cursor appears in Agent when a
message is opened for reply.

You're quite correct, BUT...is it such an onerous task to move it
down to the bottom of the text that you want to quote and start
typing your reply there?...let me know if you don't know how to
do that and I'll send detailed instructions...
--

-Gord.

No, it's certainly not a big deal to move text down. The fact is that
many of the messages I respond to on this NG are voluminous loads of
crap that I usually replace (to save bandwidth) with a simple:

Snip

Posting at the bottom does make sense if one wants and/or expects
others to read an entire thread chronologically. However,
soc.culture.palestine is so full of morons (and I recognize that I may
be one of them) that most things should only be posted/read once,
under penalty of loss of brain cells. Indeed, many things here would
be best typed by the author-moron and totally deleted before posting.
I don't know if the same applies to the other affected NG.


On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:38:16 GMT, "Gord Beaman" )
wrote:

(Richard Cranium) wrote:

Sorry Silvey. THIS is where the cursor appears in Agent when a
message is opened for reply.

You're quite correct, BUT...is it such an onerous task to move it
down to the bottom of the text that you want to quote and start
typing your reply there?...let me know if you don't know how to
do that and I'll send detailed instructions...
--

-Gord.

Richard Cranium wrote:
When the reply posting is far more interesting than the original post,
top posting is not only acceptable, it is preferable. That's why some
newsreaders automatically place the response at the top of the thread.


It makes it considerably more difficult to follow a thread. The only thing
proper bottom posting requires is trimming quotations to one or two paragraphs
max. Then you have an excellent, quite readable post.

Most top posters just reply to the comment and don't bother to trim anything off
the bottom. They add a tremendous amount of unnecessary bandwidth to any
newsgroup.

I prefer that I be able to read both the reference and the reply without having
to scroll excessively. I don't see that as too much to want.


--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

Well if a Schnerd says it, I'm sure that Mr. McCarthy agrees.
Therefore, I disagree and will top post this response in opposition.

BTW - did you really bang Candace??

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 11:39:52 -0400, "Mortimer Schnerd, RN"
wrote:

Richard Cranium wrote:
When the reply posting is far more interesting than the original post,
top posting is not only acceptable, it is preferable. That's why some
newsreaders automatically place the response at the top of the message.


It makes it considerably more difficult to follow a thread. The only thing
proper bottom posting requires is trimming quotations to one or two paragraphs
max. Then you have an excellent, quite readable post.

Most top posters just reply to the comment and don't bother to trim anything off
the bottom. They add a tremendous amount of unnecessary bandwidth to any
newsgroup.

I prefer that I be able to read both the reference and the reply without having
to scroll excessively. I don't see that as too much to want.


--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

Richard Cranium wrote:
Well if a Schnerd says it, I'm sure that Mr. McCarthy agrees.
Therefore, I disagree and will top post this response in opposition.

BTW - did you really bang Candace??


Of course. I left her smoking.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote:

Richard Cranium wrote:
Well if a Schnerd says it, I'm sure that Mr. McCarthy agrees.
Therefore, I disagree and will top post this response in opposition.

BTW - did you really bang Candace??


Of course. I left her smoking.

A cigarette one assumes?
--

-Gord.