>
> On Aug 1, 2011, at 10:25 PM, Bill Bartlett wrote:
> >
> > Carrol appears to be mixing up what Julio said, with
> > what SA said in response. Not his fault, I see from
> > SA's post that he failed to distinguish between his
> > response and what he was responding to.
> >
> > The first para quoted by Carrol is from Julio's post,
> > but SA didn't put it in quotes or in any way distinguish
> > it from his own comments.
> >
> > Then Carrol quotes the conflated mess, confusing things
> > even more. This sort of practice tends to make it hard,
> > you have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out who said what.
>
> Not to pick on Carrol or SA (who use Eudora and Thunderbird,
> I think, respectively), but:
>
> The sad thing is that most mail readers (Outlook,
> Thunderbird, Apple Mail) and webmail apps (Gmail, etc)
> provide, *by default*, a mechanism to quote the post one
> is responding to using the standard practice of adding a
> “>” in front of each line of the original post. But judging
> by the majority of the posters on this list, either the
> list is unique in membership (in terms of the number of
> users using esoteric mail programs) or it’s members are
> actively modifying their settings to sabotage this quoting
> feature. I don’t understand why either would be the case.
"Sabotage"? I see no wooden shoes, sir. Here as a matter of fixed custom I manually reformat with keystrokes every textual quote (sometimes even repairing mispelings) for _the exact same reason_ that Rauschenberg painted his white canvasses the more difficult way with a damn paintbrush rather than a spray-can of white Krylon, and I was kinda hoping my efforts would be appreciated by the _cognoscenti_, but Hell I guess not, huh? Dang.
yrs wdk