home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!dtix!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!news.cs.indiana.edu!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!en.ecn.purdue.edu!wwarner
- From: wwarner@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Art Warner)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
- Subject: PEOPLE! Why do you have to leave every FREAKIN' line in a FOLLOWUP?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov7.184248.18250@en.ecn.purdue.edu>
- Date: 7 Nov 92 18:42:48 GMT
- References: <Bx10oz.Fu8@news.cs.andrews.edu> <2W+Vr*gU0@Birdland.UUCP> <bhh17sf@rpi.edu>
- Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
- Lines: 26
-
- I have had it up to "HERE!" with all of the (F)ollow-ups that I've seen lately,
- that use every *FREAKING* line from the previous post (80 or 90 lines long),
- just to make a comment on the previous poster's .sig or something!
-
- If you've got one particular point/argument to make, please delete all of the
- unnecessary lines. If you don't know what I'm referring to, then look at some
- of the recent "stop me from buying a PC" posts. It seem like everyone and
- their brother decided to not only include the original post, but his damn .sig
- as well! I get tired of scrolling through pages of those:
- >>>>> (original post, 80 lines)
- >>> (3 line followup, now 86 lines incl. .sig)
- >> (1 line comment on last guy's sig, now 90 lines incl. his .sig too)
- > (etc.,etc.........)
-
- Get the picture?
- I end up seeing the original post as many times as someone follows-up!
- That's not only ridiculous, but also a waste of BW/storage space, and my time.
-
- I do understand the case where the new argument involves the context in which
- something said previously is pertinent.
- So please, no flame wars.
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- William "Art" Warner (317-497-1946) //\
- ex Amiga Student On-Campus Consultant \X/--\miga makes it happen!
- wwarner@en.ecn.purdue.edu IBM, Apple, Sun, & Next make it expensive!
-